User talk:Ealdgyth/Archive 98
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Ealdgyth. 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 95 | Archive 96 | Archive 97 | Archive 98 | Archive 99 | Archive 100 | → | Archive 104 |
Administrators' newsletter – May 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.
Technical news
- Progress has started on the Page Triage improvement project. This is to address the concerns raised by the community in their 2022 WMF letter that requested improvements be made to the tool.
Arbitration
- The proposed decision in the World War II and the history of Jews in Poland case is expected 11 May 2023.
Miscellaneous
- The Wikimedia Foundation annual plan 2023-2024 draft is open for comment and input through May 19. The final plan will be published in July 2023.
Edward III of England Featured article review
I have nominated Edward III of England for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:08, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:47, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Keith Miller
Keith Miller has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:19, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
An arbitration case, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland, has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:
- The Arbitration Committee formally requests that the Wikimedia Foundation develop and promulgate a white paper on the best practices for researchers and authors when writing about Wikipedians. The Committee requests that the white paper convey to researchers the principles of our movement and give specific recommendation for researchers on how to study and write about Wikipedians and their personal information in a way that respects our principles. Upon completion, we request that the white paper be distributed through the Foundation's research networks including email newsletters, social media accounts, and web publications such as the Diff blog.This request will be sent by the Arbitration Committee to Maggie Dennis, Vice President of Community Resilience & Sustainability with the understanding that the task may be delegated as appropriate.
- Remedy 5 of Antisemitism in Poland is superseded by the following restriction: All articles and edits in the topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland are subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction. When a source that is not an article in a peer-reviewed scholarly journal, an academically focused book by a reputable publisher, and/or an article published by a reputable institution is removed from an article, no editor may reinstate the source without first obtaining consensus on the talk page of the article in question or consensus about the reliability of the source in a discussion at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. Administrators may enforce this restriction with page protections, topic bans, or blocks; enforcement decisions should consider not merely the severity of the violation but the general disciplinary record of the editor in violation.
- François Robere is topic banned from the areas of World War II in Poland and the History of Jews in Poland, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- My very best wishes
- is topic banned from the areas of World War II in Poland and the History of Jews in Poland, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Based on their disruptive attempts to defend Piotrus and Volunteer Marek, My very best wishes is subject to a 1-way interaction ban with Piotrus and a 1-way interaction ban with Volunteer Marek, subject to the usual exceptions. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Volunteer Marek
- is topic banned from the areas of World War II in Poland and the History of Jews in Poland, broadly construed. This ban may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- is limited to 1 revert per page and may not revert a second time with-out a consensus for the revert, except for edits in his userspace or obvious vandalism. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- François Robere and Volunteer Marek are prohibited from interacting with, or commenting on, posts and comments made by each other, subject to the normal exceptions. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- The Arbitration Committee assumes and makes indefinite the temporary interaction ban between Levivich and Volunteer Marek. This restriction may be appealed twelve months after the enactment of this remedy, and every twelve months thereafter.
- Piotrus is reminded that while off-wiki communication is allowed in most circumstances, he has previously used off-wiki communication disruptively. He is reminded to be cautious about how and when to use off-wiki contact in the future, and to avoid future conflict, he should prioritize on-wiki communication.
- The Arbitration Committee affirms its January 2022 motion allowing editors to file for Arbitration enforcement at ARCA or Arbitration enforcement noticeboards. In recognition of the overlap of editor interest and activity between this topic area and Eastern Europe, the committee extends this provision to that topic area. It does so by adding the following text in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eastern Europe: As an alternative to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement, editors may make enforcement requests directly to the Arbitration Committee at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment.
- The Arbitration Committee separately rescinds the part of the January 2022 motion allowing transfer of a case from Arbitration Enforcement to ARCA, in recognition of the now-standard provision in Wikipedia:Contentious topics § Referrals from Arbitration Enforcement noticeboard to the full Committee. It does so by striking the following text in its entirety in item number 7: In addition to the usual processes, a consensus of administrators at AE may refer complex or intractable issues to the Arbitration Committee for resolution at ARCA, at which point the committee may resolve the request by motion or open a case to examine the issue.[archive / log]
- When considering sanctions against editors in the Eastern Europe topic area, uninvolved administrators should consider past sanctions and the findings of fact and remedies issued in this case.
Should any user subject to a restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be blocked for up to 1 year. Administrators placing blocks should take into account an editor's overall conduct and Arbitration history and seriously consider increasing the duration of blocks. Any block 3 months or longer should be reported for automatic review either (1) at ARCA or (2) to an arbitrator or clerk who will open a review at ARCA. The committee will consider presented evidence and statements before deciding by motion what, if any, actions are necessary, up to and including a site ban.
For the Arbitration Committee,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:56, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:52, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
- As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.
Technical news
- Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.
Arbitration
- The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.
Miscellaneous
- Following a community referendum, the arbitration policy has been modified to remove the ability for users to appeal remedies to Jimbo Wales.
Hello. Baldr is dead, long live Baldr!
Medieval England is fascinating, but I would not want to live there! May your interest in Medieval England always continue, however!
I am NOT trying to start an editing war on the so-called Heathenry article, but errors keep me awake at night!
To say Baldr dies--full stop--is misleading. If you do not want the truth--supported by primary sources--can we then just delete the error and not say he dies?
Thanks 45.53.207.255 (talk) 02:17, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Oh, I travel, and my IP number will change. Please post your reply on the article's talk page. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.53.207.255 (talk) 02:20, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
- The IP is a Holtj sockpuppet. I've opened an investigation over at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Holtj#Suspected_sockpuppets. Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:14, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:22, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Jackson and HJP
Oh, Ealdgyth dear ... might you have time to look at the bottom of Wikipedia:Featured article review/Andrew Jackson/archive1 and opine about minefields ?? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:24, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
The Core Contest winners announced
The winners of the 2023 The Core Contest are announced 🎉. We had an amazing set of improvements this year, and the judges (Femke, Aza24 and Casliber) would like to thank everybody who joined and congratulate the winners.
- First place goes to Buidhe for improving The Holocaust; very core, highly relevant; their work on bringing geographical balance to the article puts the topic in a whole different light. We also commend improvements to sourcing and prose
- A close second place goes to Phlsph7 for improving Education from an unstructured jumble into a well-sourced piece of instruction
- Third prize goes to Johnbod for improving Donatello, a near five-fold expansion with great sourcing and fantastic imagery
- A tie for fourth place goes to Thebiguglyalien for improving Crime, for a strong improvement in sourcing
- A tie for fifth place goes to Sammielh for International law, improved by converting contextless listicles into a proper sourced prose
If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:07, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Why do the links absolutely need to be there? This isn't the norm when using the c. template, and, as far as I can see, there are only two of them in the article. If there are any other templates that need links removed from them, point me in their direction; until then, let the edits stand. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 12:43, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- This should be on the talk page of the article. My preference would not be to have the template at all, frankly. And the template does not say "do not use this parameter which we set up to allow for normal linking" ... so there is no reason not to be consistent in the linking behavior with all the other links in the article - the ones like Norman Conquest or England. Ealdgyth (talk) 12:48, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "
[m]y preference would not be to have the template at all
"? Tim O'Doherty (talk) 12:55, 23 June 2023 (UTC)- I mean, we would not have a template to link to a basic word when we could (if we need a link at all) link to c. like that. At one point we had an article on "circa" that we could just .. link to without having a template. The template is unneeded and just adds extra coding to an article. Ealdgyth (talk) 13:09, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ealdgyth, just because one does not like some parts of an edit, doesn't mean one should revert the entire edit. WP is meant to evolve and accept changes which might be improvements. If one does not like some edits, then one should suggest how to change them. But we can't leave it alone as if it is somehow permanently settled for all eternity. —GoldRingChip 18:58, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- This belongs on the talk page of the article! Ealdgyth (talk) 19:11, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ealdgyth, just because one does not like some parts of an edit, doesn't mean one should revert the entire edit. WP is meant to evolve and accept changes which might be improvements. If one does not like some edits, then one should suggest how to change them. But we can't leave it alone as if it is somehow permanently settled for all eternity. —GoldRingChip 18:58, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- I mean, we would not have a template to link to a basic word when we could (if we need a link at all) link to c. like that. At one point we had an article on "circa" that we could just .. link to without having a template. The template is unneeded and just adds extra coding to an article. Ealdgyth (talk) 13:09, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:01, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2023
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).
Administrator changes
Bureaucrat changes
Guideline and policy news
- Contributions to the English Wikipedia are now released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) license instead of CC BY-SA 3.0. Contributions are still also released under the GFDL license.
Technical news
- Discussion is open regarding a proposed global policy regarding third-party resources. Third-party resources are computer resources that reside outside of Wikimedia production websites.
Arbitration
- Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.
WikiCup 2023 July newsletter
The third round of the 2023 WikiCup has come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 175 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Thebiguglyalien, with 919 points from a featured article on Frances Cleveland as well as five good articles and many reviews,
Unlimitedlead, with 862 points from a high-scoring featured articles on Henry II of England and numerous reviews,
Iazyges, with 560 points from a high-scoring featured article on Tiberius III.
Contestants achieved 11 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 47 good articles, 72 featured or good article reviews, over 100 DYKs and 40 ITN appearances. As always, any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! 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 (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:18, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
TFA for Jacob Gens
Hi Ealdgyth, I was thinking of nominating Jacob Gens for WP:TFA for Sep 14, the anniversary of his death. Normally I would nominate biographies on their birthday, but Gens was born on April 1 so that would be inappropriate. I saw on the article's FAC talk page that in 2017 you were hesitant to run this article on the Main Page. Is this still the case? If I nominated the article, I would use the blurb that Dank wrote on the article's talk page. I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Z1720 (talk) 17:47, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- In general, I'm hesitant to run this on the main page because it's a very much ... grey zone thing. The old view of Gens was that he, along with all leaders of the Jewish Ghettos/etc, were villains and collaborators and I don't want to have to deal with the folks quoting Hannah Arendt as if she was the latest word in Holocaust scholarship. I'm not sure the exposure on the main page is worth the hassle. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:34, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:00, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Previews
What makes you think previews does not make sense? A bunch of articles has it. Notrealname1234 (talk) 01:25, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Third opinion on source review?
Picked up the source review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Uranium mining in the Bancroft area/archive1 because I had doubts about several of the sources used. The nominator and I disagree on the propriety of two of the sources (Reynolds' local history book and Proulx's masters thesis) and I was wondering if you would be willing/able to briefly weigh in there either way, since you're pretty much at the head of the pantheon of FAC source reviewers. Hog Farm Talk 00:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)