![]() | 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 35 | ← | Archive 37 | Archive 38 | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | → | Archive 45 |
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Copy-paste from Talk:Killing of George Floyd
EEng wrote:
I really like 2+3, but 1+3 might be an easier sell. An added benefit is that this represents lessening the burden on editors patrolling requested edits.
Is there any perceived benefit to noninvolved editors responding to edit requests? It's possible the regulars at an article could be owny enough that they just mark all requested changes as answered/not done. Right now they'd have to answer those requests within minutes to ensure no fresh set of eyes shows up. Changing it to at least Z days might be seen as a downside? —valereee (talk) 13:58, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
(Saw the comment on the article's Talk Page, and followed the discussion here) As another possible idea (independent from the ones above), might it help to write a polite essay on the problem of drive-by patrolling editors who flip edit requests to "answered" while posting useless and/or unhelpful comments that frustrate newbies? The intended audience would be the problematic drive-by editors themselves, explaining to them why they cause more problems than they solve by their behavior (including examples). Then create a WP shortcut to that essay page (perhaps "WP:EDITREQUESTFAIL" or something more catchy), and when you see a drive-by editor make a problematic edit like that, just revert them with a polite edit summary like "Reverted good faith but unhelpful comment per WP:EDITREQUESTFAIL". Doing so would 1) remove their useless post, 2) flip the "Y" back to "N" on the answer (to attract a better answer from a more knowledgeable editor), and 3) politely direct the drive-by editor to a well written page where he or she can learn why their short-sighted and problematic edit was reverted. I suspect most of the problematic editors would learn quickly and stop doing that after a single instance; only obtuse patrollers would go right back to the Talk Page in question to combatively revert your revert of their useless post. Would instituting something like this be worthwhile, and gradually educate the community over time to stop making those kinds of unhelpful posts that mess up the edit request process? Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 23:55, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
EEng invited me here from the article talk because I was "missing the point". Conceptually, I have no problem if we want to optimize the edit request process site wide. However, the edit request response that spurred this was fine. While the request did not cite any sources, we don't need a response that "us regulars know everything there is to know, it's been discussed ad nauseaum, and consensus ain't changing." Perhaps there is something we missing before, there is new information, or this editor has a new angle? Or maybe they're just wrong or trolling. In any event, inviting them to establish consensus is a neutral response that encourages good-faith editors and does not feed any would-be trolls.—Bagumba (talk) 05:45, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
... made their best guess as to what might be a halfway reasonable response ...Maybe, maybe not. I as a semi-regular on that page would likely have said something as neutral and avoided outright saying the OP was wrong or assume I was necessarily up-to-date on the latest sources. You do have a point of regulars throwing the word "consensus" around, which might not be accessible to a complete newbie, but neither is pointing them that a way to an FAQ or giving them the impression that consensus cannot change because I am all wise (well ... I am, but ...) While I'm not saying edit request patrolling can't be improved, I am saying that the response in this specific case was fine, even if the (speculated) rationale behind it might not have been.—Bagumba (talk) 12:35, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
move away from this particular responsemean, exactly? EEng 17:12, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
... leave aside the quality of this particular response—Bagumba (talk) 00:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
an edit request response from someone who is unfamiliar with the article isn't likely to be as on point as the most-helpful response that could be given by the most-well-intentioned regular, and so when a patroller lands on a talk page at such an article, it's highly likely the best move is to move on to the next edit request
– Yes, though I'd put it a bit more strongly: Even a mediocre response from a regular is likely to be at least as good as any response make by someone unfamiliar with the article. I've bolded part of your post because it's pretty much what we want, though I'd add that even better than the patroller recognizing they should move on would be for the system to never take the patroller to the page at all. EEng 17:12, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
I think you must be reading something I said backwards, but no matter. So... shall we summarize the possible changes to the process we're contemplating, and then where do we raise this? EEng 17:45, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
EEng is this still on the radar? —valereee (talk) 21:53, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
I have another thought on how to go about this, but first I need to understand something. Where do these protected edit requests come from? What I mean is, how do IP editors stumble into the place where they're told "You can't edit this article, but if you fill in this box that will make a post to the talk page, with this little template attached"? I had imagine that it pops up when they try to edit the article, but I logged out just now and I realize that, in fact, when an IP tries to edit a protected article, there is simply no edit button for them to click. So where, exactly, do these templated posts come from?
The reason I ask is that, it seems to me, the way to fix our problem is just to make is so the edit-request template is omitted from the post. In other words, we don't need options for how the request will be handled, what we need an option to make the post just a simple post, without the request template. EEng 19:10, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
EEng, found this one today: Special:Permalink/1006579385#Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2021. The request was answered in seven minutes with canned "unclear what you're asking" response to someone's first edit. —valereee (talk) 17:21, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Thinking of this problem again after recent events. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:19, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
25 May 2021 —valereee (talk) 21:52, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Julie Hayden (teacher) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BuySomeApples (talk) 19:18, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey Valereee, as you probably remember (From my horrible edits months ago), I am under a Post-1992 US Politics T-Ban. I took a long break from editing and before I fully came back, I read up on dozens of policies. On my user page, I have two sections (User:Elijahandskip#Outside Wikipedia Recognition & part of User:Elijahandskip#About how I edit) which is about stupid stuff related to my T-Ban. I would like to remove that information from my user page, but as I discovered back in April, messing with any of that information without admin approval results in breaking my t-ban,([1]). I want to start fresh and get away from my mistakes months ago. Heck, I stopped editing between June 20, and today (August 24). So, would you let me remove that information from my user page? Elijahandskip (talk) 00:11, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
![]()
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 22:31, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hi, I reported Aslanstatistic123 for disruptive editing (has been warned many times since 2015) and I'm waiting for an admin reponse. In the meantime, I believe that the best move is to just mass protect dozens of Kurdish-related pages. I want to ask if there would be support for such a move from an admin (we also have the sanctions put on Kurdish subjects) --Semsûrî (talk) 15:16, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
I have drafted an alternative version of this essay at User:Cullen328/sandbox/One last chance and invite your input. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:00, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2021 review/Issues on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks for nominating me as editor of the week. It was a very pleasant surprise when I got on my computer after getting up here in Melbourne. --Bduke (talk) 00:13, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() Mona Sahlin is a Swedish politician who was leader of the opposition and leader of the Swedish Social Democratic Party from 2007 to 2011. Pictured is Sahlin in 2010.
Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Grocery store • Crème brûlée Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:06, 30 August 2021 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • |
---|
On 31 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Julie Hayden (teacher), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that seventeen-year-old Julie Hayden (pictured) was killed by members of the White Man's League days after starting a position teaching Black children, and became "the poster child of southern violence"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Julie Hayden (teacher). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Julie Hayden (teacher)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Schwede66 12:02, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I request for unblock. Check my talk page to known. Thanks you. 1Way4Together - J. Smile | This is not !vote 02:51, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants, The Rambling Man and
Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being
Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are
Gog the Mild,
Lee Vilenski,
BennyOnTheLoose,
Amakuru and
Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles. Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:02, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).
Hello, Valereee
Could I persuade you to help with moving an edit notice? I apparently need to be one of administrators, template editors, or page movers, and I'm not any of those.
I (successfully) moved List of County-Designated Highways in Michigan to List of county-designated highways in Michigan, per MOS:TITLECAPS, including its talk page. I also renamed the talk Archive 1 page and adjusted the target in the talk page itself. But the initial move presented me with a notice that "This page has an editnotice at Template:Editnotices/Page/List of County-Designated Highways in Michigan. Please move it to Template:Editnotices/Page/List of county-designated highways in Michigan."
That's where I'm stuck. Can you help, please? TIA,— JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 13:41, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() The past is the set of all events that occurred before a given point in time. Pictured is the oil on canvas painting Everything is in the past, painted by Vassily Maximov in 1889.
Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Mona Sahlin • Grocery store Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:06, 6 September 2021 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • |
---|
|
Season 2 of a Belgian Netflix series called Into the Night. Basic premise: something-something happens to the Sun's polarity resulting in the bombardment of all living things during the day by neutronic radiation — like a neutron bomb's radiation, with a half-life of only fifteen minutes, but is "roughly ten times more effective at causing biological damage compared to gamma or beta radiation of equivalent energy exposure" (Neutron_radiation#Health_hazards_and_protection says). In other words: night is safe, day is death.
So, basically, this airliner is forced to be stay at night at all times, all while landing safely to affect repairs, get fuel, get food (which like all other organic matter gets damaged by the radiation), and manage other crises. And they always have just a couple of hours before they need to escape the sunrise trailing them. Quite reminiscent of the masterpiece episode 33 (Battlestar Galactica), if you're familiar, except for an entire 6 episode season (and now just started season 2). And there's a great subpack, so I even get Hebrew (again)! El_C 16:41, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() The history of art focuses on objects made by humans in visual form for aesthetic purposes. Pictured ia a dun horse from the Lascaux cave paintings.
Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Past • Mona Sahlin Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 13 September 2021 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • |
---|
Hello Valereee,
Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.
Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.
At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.
There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.
If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.
Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.
To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:33, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Valereee. The article for improvement of the week is:
Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: History of art • Past Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:06, 20 September 2021 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • |
---|
Hi Valereee! You blocked User:J. Smile (Love & V.A.V.I) from namespace, noting that they may need to be blocked from talkspace too if they are being disruptive there. Well, they have now made disruptive talkspace edits. ––FormalDude talk 09:04, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 46, July – August 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:15, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia proposals" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 19:32, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Valereee. The article for improvement of the week is:
No such thing as a stupid question Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Student exchange program • History of art Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:06, 27 September 2021 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • |
---|
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Notability (television) on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 17:30, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
![]()
Special event:
|
--Rosiestep (talk) 01:37, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Hi Valereee -- I'm just checking in with volunteers for the WiG Good Article Editathon... but I see you currently have no internet access! If you're able to resolve internet connectivity issues and are still interested in helping out with our 20-minute article assessments, you're welcome to jump in at any point during October. Basic plan: as requests come in, volunteers will mark the request as "in progress," leave their comments on the talk page of the article, then mark the request as "done". We'll be aiming to identify any major issues in articles and suggest priorities for the editor to work on. Best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 18:49, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).
![]() A geographer is a physical scientist, social scientist or humanist whose area of study is geography, the study of Earth's natural environment and human society, including how society and nature interacts. Pictured is The Geographer (1668-69), by Johannes Vermeer.
Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: No such thing as a stupid question • Student exchange program Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:06, 4 October 2021 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • |
---|