User talk:JzG/Archive 167
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:JzG. 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 160 | ← | Archive 165 | Archive 166 | Archive 167 | Archive 168 | Archive 169 | Archive 170 |
Hi there. Apologies if I've misunderstood the process, but could you help me understand how this edit happened the day after dnbnumber dot com was added to the blacklist? Thanks! —johndburger 20:01, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
- No idea, that should not be possible. please report it at fhe blacklist page in the troubleshooting section. i am on a mobile device in a hotel in Bengaluru so can't easily do it myself. Guy (Help!) 07:57, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
This is not a trout
I'm sorry to hear that your wifi is carp. Is there something fishy going on? –dlthewave ☎ 17:20, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- Ha! I cannot type for tooffe. Guy (Help!) 18:41, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Anybody familiar?
FYI. Leviv ich 00:21, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
- Hmmm, not a familiar choice of subjects. I have added PC protection to Greta Thunberg based on BLP issues with those edits. Guy (Help!) 04:59, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
United Daughters of the Confederacy
Dear JgZ,
Do you "own" the United Daughters of the Confederacy Wikipedia page?
The reason I ask is because its my understanding that Wikipedia is a platform anyone can edit; yet, it appears that, based on your recent reversions, if the edits do not agree with the exact subject heading or sentance paraphrasing that you ideologically subscribe to, edits are reverted (with intimidation, I might add). I cannot help but question your motives as they very well could be biased, since by your own admission (from your own Wikipedia profile) you state the following: "This user is one of the 532 left-wing thought police who aggressively force their biased perspective on the rest of the world."
Having read the Wikipedia "non-bias" neutrality rules, I can't help but think arbitration dispute might be in order.
That said, I would like to understand your point of view as I might be persuaded otherwise. Thank you. __Lieutcoluseng (talk) 11:47, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) But if you go to arbcom, you'd have to explain describing significant POV content changes as "Copyedit (minor)" in your edit summaries. Leviv ich 14:51, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
It happens to the best of us.
Hey Guy. Just coming back to the dramahz at AN/I. I know this kind of criticism, well-founded or not, can be very demoralizing, and I also know that we're all real humans who feel real human emotions, and we sometimes overreact in ways we shouldn't. That doesn't make us less valuable. Just want to remind you that you're still one of the most respected admins around, and, while you can and should learn from this experience, I hope you will bounce back and continue standing up for what's right. Because you're not wrong very often. Regards, ~Swarm~ {talk} 05:20, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
- I don't have the slightest idea what this is about, but just reading it my reaction was oh crap, I'm sorry. Hang in there NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 08:24, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
It don't work
Hi Guy, A day or two ago I think you protected Greta Thunberg from IP editing, but IP vandalism is still sneaking through. Could you look at that please? While you're at it, there is a surge of interest in [{School climate strike]] too, since today is the big international joint strike day. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:38, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for pending protection there NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 01:00, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
Some support
I know we don't see eye to eye on everything, but I'd appreciate some support here if you think the Crapwatch is a good initiative. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 12:03, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
As the administrator who originally protected this page from creation, can you please unsalt Kiwi Farms? The website has received significant coverage from sources like New York magazine and News.com.au. This topic may pass WP:GNG. I've created Draft:Kiwi Farms, which may be expanded further. feminist (talk) 09:27, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Feminist: Guy isn't around at the moment, but I've taken a look and along with those sources and this in Medium I agree that it is notable and have moved it to mainspace. I will keep an eye on it as well. SmartSE (talk) 12:04, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks! feminist (talk) 02:04, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
You've got mail
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Doug Weller talk 13:52, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Requesting your opinion
Hi. A conflict has arisen on the Adam Hughes article. Can you offer your opinion in this discussion? It would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 21:29, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
ANI Notice
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Acupuncture: not sure what to do here. Guy Macon (talk) 18:00, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).
|
|
|
Technical news
- In Special:Preferences under "Appearance" → "Advanced options", there is now an option to show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link.
- The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Please see meta:Community health initiative/User reporting system consultation 2019 to provide your input on this idea.
Arbitration
- The Arbitration Committee clarified that the General 1RR prohibition for Palestine-Israel articles may only be enforced on pages with the {{ARBPIA 1RR editnotice}} edit notice.
Miscellaneous
- Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
- As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.
ArbCom 2019 special circular
 |
Administrators must secure their accounts
The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.
|
This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:54, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)
ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.
Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.
We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.
For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment concluded that creating pages in the portal namespace should be restricted to autoconfirmed users.
- Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.
Technical news
- XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.
Arbitration
- In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases,
the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions
; administrators found failing to have adequately done sowill not be resysopped automatically
. All current administrators have been notified of this change. - Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.
- In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases,
Miscellaneous
- A request for comment is currently open to amend the community sanctions procedure to exclude non XfD or CSD deletions.
- A proposal to remove pre-2009 indefinite IP blocks is currently open for discussion.
YGM
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Administrators' newsletter – June 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).
Administrator changes
Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
- An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
- An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.
Technical news
- The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
- Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.
Miscellaneous
- The previously discussed unblocking of IP addresses indefinitely-blocked before 2009 was approved and has taken place.
- The 2019 talk pages consultation produced a report for Phase 1 and has entered Phase 2.
Vaccine hesitancy
Hi. I'm confused about how Vaccine controversies got moved to Vaccine hesitancy. Your edit summary refers to a consensus, but I couldn't find anything on the talk page. I'm not necessarily against the move, I'm just trying to understand it. R2 (bleep) 20:03, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
- (talk page gnome)@Ahrtoodeetoo: I wish JzG was back, but his last edit was on 14 March 2019. —PaleoNeonate – 20:22, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
- Damn, what a shame, Guy has been a great contributor. I hope he comes back too. R2 (bleep) 20:35, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
Consensus Required
Hi JzG, you might remember my December 2018 proposal here to replace the "Consensus Required" sanction with an "Enforced BRD" sanction. (You commented there saying you thought it would be an improvement.) The proposal kind of became moot and went unclosed into the arthives after Arbcom changed their DS rules in a way that allowed me to remove/replace all of the Consensus Required sanctions thathad been placed by User:Coffee. (All in all I removed it from 26 low-activity pages and replaced it with the BRD sanction on about 55 other pages.) Anyway there are still around 25 or so pages that I could find in the topic area that still have the old CR sanction, and two of those (Judicial Watch and Kirsten Gillibrand) were placed by you. I was wondering if I might be able to convince you to lighten the CR sanction to the Enforced BRD on those two articles. You can see the exact wording of the two sanctions in the documentation at {{American politics AE}} ~Awilley (talk) 03:34, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
- Dang, just noticed you're not around. I hope you're having a nice break. ~Awilley (talk) 03:38, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Nomination for merging of Template:Partisan sources
Template:Partisan sources has been nominated for merging with Template:Third-party. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. wumbolo ^^^ 23:15, 23 June 2019 (UTC)