User talk:Mojo Hand/Archive 2021
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Mojo Hand. 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. |
Administrators' newsletter – January 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.
Technical news
- You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.
Arbitration
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes)
. The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason). - Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
A bit of help here?
Could you please block Pushforatonofgold, it's a sock of Evlekis. TPA will also need to be revoked. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 16:16, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- Looks like BethNaught beat me to it :). --Mojo Hand (talk) 16:21, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- Yep, though thanks for helping out as an admin. Sorry to bother you, have a great day :-) Pahunkat (talk) 16:36, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- No bother at all. Cheers.--Mojo Hand (talk) 16:43, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
- Yep, though thanks for helping out as an admin. Sorry to bother you, have a great day :-) Pahunkat (talk) 16:36, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Deletion of BGYO (group) page
Hello, I'm interested in recreating the page for BGYO (group) that you deleted earlier as requested by community members who said the group should be debuted before a page can be created for them. I am also adding more citations from secondary sources. Since the group has already debuted, I was wondering if you could give me some advice before I set up the page?
Thank you, User:SenyorOtter (talk) 01:31, 30 January 2021 (AST)
- Hello SenyorOtter. As the AFD just closed a week ago, I would advise not rushing to create a new page. In addition, it's often a good idea to start a new article in your user space and invite input from another editor interested in the topic.
- I also see that some of the concerns in the AFD were that the band hadn't yet officially debuted or released a single. If that has now changed, then the argument for having the article is stronger.
- I hope this helps. Cheers.--Mojo Hand (talk) 16:34, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
- I see, thank you very much Mojo Hand! I'll keep your advice in mind. This really helps.
- Best, User:SenyorOtter (talk) 11:25, 01 February 2021 (AST)
Edits to Politics of Virginia
Hello. Your message regarding my edit to the Politics of Virginia page says merely that it "seemed" less than neutral. I would be very grateful if you would check the sources I have used, which appear as footnotes, to verify that everything added is true. Jon Liss has aligned with Liberation Road (as well as the Communist Party USA and other hard-left groups), but discussing the "Inside-Outside" network as a model for political action. There is nothing non-objective about this, and New Virginia Majority has played a significant role in turning Virginia from "red" to "blue." It even has claimed credit for this in the New York Times. Thank you. ~~~~
- Hello Goldstein2021. Your edits have now been challenged by three different editors - please do not continue to add the same content without addressing concerns on the article talk page. Your addition does have some sources, but the overall sourcing and tone of the addition are not consistent with Wikipedia policies. In addition to the concerns about sourcing and bias, three paragraphs about the "New Virginia Movement" adds undue weight to the topic in a relatively short article that is supposed to cover the entire history of politcs in Virgnina.
- One's politics should never be obvious in the contributions one makes to articles.Mojo Hand (talk) 16:29, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Mojo Hand: Well, well. My edits have been challenged by "three different editors" (presumably you mean yourself, Diannaa, and ...? The third remains obscure to me). This is customarily disappointing from Wikipedia, and only goes further toward explaining the worldwide loss of faith in the platform's objectivity. There isn't even any mention of federal elections in 2020, nor any discussion of the activism that caused the state to turn completely "blue." In fact, the State Power Caucus (of which New Virginia Majority is a part) proved decisive in Virginia, and it is a fact that the founder of both the State Power Caucus and NVM has aligned with far-left organizations (as the sources authored by him, and provided by me, clearly demonstrate). Jon Liss is a hard-left political activist in Virginia, and also apparently an apologist for Maoism and the Chinese Communist regime. The connection of some of these hard-left groups to Communist China can be traced through the Black Lives Matter organization, which has received financial support from the Chinese government (or Chinese Communist Party). It is not outrageous to conclude that Wikipedia, in light of its effort to suppress this information, also receives financial support from the Chinese government, meaning that it cannot afford to highlight facts that might generate public outrage about Chinese Communist Party involvement in American society, the American economy, or American politics. That is a great pity. Goldstein2021 (talk) 17:36, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
- Trying to maintain objectivity in articles is a huge challenge for Wikipedia, as bias is inevitable when content is generated by millions of users, many of whom have strong political opinions. That's why one of my primary goals in editing is to focus on the neutral point of view as much as possible. As a result, I've been accused of being both liberal and conservative, while no one here really knows were my personal political beliefs lie. I've had some success over the years in building consensus over controversial topics, and I strongly recommend using the WP:BRD method. Mojo Hand (talk) 21:35, 15 February 2021 (UTC). FWIW - the editors who have had concerns with your edits are me, Diannaa, Avillar86 and an IP editor.
Administrators' newsletter – February 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).
|
|
|
Arbitration
- The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover
post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people
, replacing the 1932 cutoff.
- The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover
Miscellaneous
- Voting in the 2021 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2021, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2021, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- Wikipedia has now been around for 20 years, and recently saw its billionth edit!
Administrators' newsletter – March 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a 2019 RfC in favor of creating one such a policy.
- A request for comment is in progress to remove F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a, which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
- A request for comment seeks to grant page movers the
delete-redirectuserright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. The full proposal is at Wikipedia:Page mover/delete-redirect. - A request for comment asks if sysops may
place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions
? - There is a discussion in progress concerning automatic protection of each day's featured article with Pending Changes protection.
Technical news
- When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
- When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
- There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).
Arbitration
- By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions
authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people.
Sanctions issued under GamerGate are now considered Gender and sexuality sanctions. - The Kurds and Kurdistan case was closed, authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for
the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed
.
- By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions
Miscellaneous
- Following the 2021 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AmandaNP, Operator873, Stanglavine, Teles, and Wiki13.
A question regarding bundled AfDs
Hi. You recently closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meg Meeker as keep, while noting that consensus was less clear regarding Strong Fathers, Strong Daughters. I noticed that XFDcloser added the {{old AfD multi}} template to Talk:Strong Fathers, Strong Daughters with the result listed as keep, even though you did not close the discussion with consensus to keep the book. Is there a workaround in the {{old AfD multi}} template to accommodate situations like this where a bundled AfD is closed with consensus to keep one page but not the other? I ask because I went ahead and redirected the book to Meeker's article, and it's misleading to have a template on the talk page saying there was consensus to keep the article at AfD. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 03:31, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Lord Bolingbroke. Sorry for the delay in responding - I've been off Wiki for a bit. You make a valid point, and I adjusted the template on Talk:Strong Fathers, Strong Daughters to provide more context to the close. Cheers. --Mojo Hand (talk) 15:06, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, that looks good to me. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 15:08, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).
Administrator changes
Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
- Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the
delete-redirectuserright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.
Technical news
- When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
- Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)
Arbitration
- A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.
Administrators' newsletter – May 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
- The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. Consensus was found in a previous RfC for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus.
Technical news
- The user group
oversightwill be renamed tosuppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.
- The user group
Arbitration
- The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.
strait laced
You reverted my correction of "straight laced" to "strait laced". https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boardwalk_Empire&type=revision&diff=1023291948&oldid=1023289055 Look it up in a dictionary. "Strait" = tight, as in a tightly laced corset. "straight" makes no sense. https://writingexplained.org/idiom-dictionary/straight-laced "The correct spelling of this phrase is strait-laced. Referring to something as straight-laced is a confusion of the words strait and straight, which are not the same." Also http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/strait-laced https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/strait_laced Enough people misspell it to make it seem odd, but "strait" is undoubtedly correct. 111.220.83.242 (talk) 11:15, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for judging this on the merits. 111.220.83.242 (talk) 07:33, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Blue Cha Cha and Henry Levy House
Hola. What on earth happened here? Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Honestly I have no idea. Seems to be some kind of glitch with the Wikipedia:XFDcloser script.--Mojo Hand (talk) 14:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Greetings. Question, you closed this as keep, and while the !votes do show that preponderance, all the keep !votes are based on WP:BCAST, which is part of WP:NMEDIA, and never address GNG. WP:SNG says "Editors are cautioned that these WikiProject notability guidance pages should be treated as essays and do not establish new notability standards, lacking the weight of broad consensus of the general and subject-specific notability guidelines in various discussions" Can I ask your thoughts? The reason I'm curious is that other recent SNG's (e.g. NFOOTY, NCRIC) have recently started to be re-evaluated and to no longer trump GNG. Thoughts? Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 15:37, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah - I really debated relisting the AFD on the grounds that there was no real discussion on the quality of the sources, and the focus was purely on the SNG - which I agree is not ideal. However, given the current consensus at the AFD, I figured that a relist would, at most, result in a no-consensus close.
- The tension between the GNG and the SNG's has been going on as long as I can remember, though it seems like we are glacially making progress towards more sensible and consistent treatment of articles on the margins of the SNGs. Personally, I think lists or group articles for subjects that only get routine coverage or merely technically meet the SNG is probably the best long term solution. However, that broader consensus ought to come at the guideline or SNG page level. That said, arguments at individual AFDs can be the spark to motivate those larger discussion, but that kind of fight didn't seem to be developing at this particular AFD.--Mojo Hand (talk) 18:55, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the detailed response. I agree there are 4 or 5 dedicated editors who like to uphold the sanctity of BCAST (all of whom cast their !votes every single time on one of these pages is nominated). Beyond that core, I haven't seen a broad consensus that the SNG should trump GNG. I appreciate your viewpoint, and I totally agree that these types of stations are better handled in list articles. However, I still think that GNG should be upheld. But again, thank you. Onel5969 TT me 22:14, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).
Administrator changes
Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless- Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)
Guideline and policy news
- Consensus was reached to deprecate Wikipedia:Editor assistance.
- Following a Request for Comment the Book namespace was deprecated.
Technical news
- Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.
Arbitration
- After a Clarification request, the Arbitration Committee modified Remedy 5 of the Antisemitism in Poland case. This means sourcing expectations are a discretionary sanction instead of being present on all articles. It also details using the talk page or the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to discuss disputed sources.
Administrators' newsletter – July 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
- An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.
Technical news
- IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.
Arbitration
- The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.
Precious anniversary
 | |
| Nine years! |
|---|
Neutrality
Hello. My edit was a neutral POV. I never stated that there was fraud. Simply, allegations of fraud. I never said whether they were true or false. Thank you. 17:05, 2 August 2021 (talk) 13:04, 2 Aug 2021 (UTC)
- Hello. I understand that you are trying to be more neutral in the way you present the information. However, in Wikipedia, using general words like "alleged" or "many claim" without citing who is making the allegations is considered a type of unsupported attribution - see WP:Weasel. It is always better to state who is making the allegations and provide a source, especially in statements related to politics.--Mojo Hand (talk) 22:58, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.
Technical news
- Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)
Arbitration
- Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions.
Miscellaneous
- You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.
The National Conference Center Good Article Reassessment
The National Conference Center, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual 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. --Whiteguru (talk) 05:20, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).
Administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
- A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
- A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
- A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.
Technical news
- The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.
Arbitration
- A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.
Miscellaneous
- The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.
Administrators' newsletter – October 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain high-risk templates.
- Following a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.
Technical news
- DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.
Arbitration
- A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
- Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
- The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.
Miscellaneous
- Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
- The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
My edit on The Braxtons
I'm a little confused as to what's so unconstructive about updating sources to their modern locations?--141.157.254.24 (talk) 14:02, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – November 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.
Technical news
- Toolhub is a catalogue of tools which can be used on Wikimedia wikis. It is at https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/.
Arbitration
- GeneralNotability, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections. Ivanvector and John M Wolfson are reserve commissioners.
- Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves to stand in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections from 07 November 2021 until 16 November 2021.
Miscellaneous
- The 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of five new CheckUsers and two new Oversighters.
WP:ROA
I think I misclicked and accidentally tagged it for deletion. I did not mean for that to happen. EthanGaming7640 (talk) 23:46, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
- The deletion request was actually from 力, who created the redirect. The user’s rationale was, “The proposal to use this shortcut fizzled out”. Mojo Hand (talk) 03:13, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
- Yup. No point pretending the short-link to a failed proposal will work in the future. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 04:26, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Candice
You were wrong to fix it. I was adding the truth of what other castmayes have stated. Biggienerdz (talk) 15:08, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
- Insults and personal opinions do not belong on Wikipedia.--Mojo Hand (talk) 15:30, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
Jared Polis Edit
The edit was made by a shared IP, I did not vandalize the page, and for what it is worth I am a supporter of his. Thank you for reverting it and removing the vandalism.
206.168.44.220 (talk) 16:22, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
- No worries - those edits were from 2018, and we know that IP addresses frequently change.--Mojo Hand (talk) 16:37, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
Barbi Afrika
I created her page last year and it is true that back in the day she did not have that many reliable sources nor she was notable enough to fit into Wikipedia, but things changed drastically now that I did a research. When it comes to being a singer, Barbi Afrika had few singles charting in music, and when it comes to being a TikToker, she even won the award for being the TikToker of the year 2021. She was even nominated in the same category in 2020., and she was as well nominated on the MAC Music Awards Ceremony held in Belgrade in 2020. She is mentioned in many news and other sources in various languages and can be seen on national TV and radio as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Serbiawiki (talk • contribs) 17:29, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
- And I have created the new page a few days ago, but it got deleted. Can you please check? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Serbiawiki (talk • contribs) 09:20, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- Hello Serbiawiki and sorry for the slow response. I looked at the new page you created compared to the one deleted at AFD, and honestly they didn't look that different. If Barbi Afrika is someone who is generating more coverage over time, then a good way to start the article may be as a draft. There you can develop the article and get some feedback, without as much scrutiny as you get in the main Wiki space.--Mojo Hand (talk) 16:05, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
An issue at List of Disney Channel original films
Hi, a more experienced user is calling my updating references “disruptive” and “not constructive” but left a warning on my page before starting a genuine conversation. His refusal to discuss really feels like “Rules for thee not for me”. Would you be able to help me out?--141.157.254.24 (talk) 02:56, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- FTR, this IP has been disruptive at my Talk page before (c. October 7, 2021) so there's already a history here. And I've tried explaining exactly what this most recent issue was, though they continue to pretend they haven't heard it. In their defense, they have not tried to revert (that particular edit) since I've explained, so there is that. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:07, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- 141.157.254.24 (talk · contribs) seems to have an unfortunate history of being labeled as unconstructive, when their edits are clearly in good faith. I know I was guilty of this, and I think we would all do better to discuss more and template less.--Mojo Hand (talk) 15:35, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- It really feels like IJ is trying to drag me through the mud and doesn’t like when they’re being called out for their behavior. Makes up claims that try to be definitive but in reality have no weight to them. Every intention of talking above me, but not with me, and won’t actually listen. I ask how I was being disruptive and unconstructive, I demonstrate exactly how neither are true, insists on the labels anyway.--141.157.254.24 (talk) 18:39, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- Hi 141.157.254.24 (talk · contribs). Looking at your talk page, I tend to agree that the templates for unconstructive editing were not especially productive or friendly. Seems like IP editors clearly get less benefit of the doubt. I have found the WP:BRD process to be helpful when someone challenges my edits, so I do recommend that. I will also keep an eye on your talk page. However, my time on Wiki is inconsistent.--Mojo Hand (talk) 16:39, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
- It really feels like IJ is trying to drag me through the mud and doesn’t like when they’re being called out for their behavior. Makes up claims that try to be definitive but in reality have no weight to them. Every intention of talking above me, but not with me, and won’t actually listen. I ask how I was being disruptive and unconstructive, I demonstrate exactly how neither are true, insists on the labels anyway.--141.157.254.24 (talk) 18:39, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
- 141.157.254.24 (talk · contribs) seems to have an unfortunate history of being labeled as unconstructive, when their edits are clearly in good faith. I know I was guilty of this, and I think we would all do better to discuss more and template less.--Mojo Hand (talk) 15:35, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message
| | Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Administrators' newsletter – December 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).
Administrator changes
Technical news
- Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
- The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)
Arbitration
- Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections is open until 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).
- The already authorized standard discretionary sanctions for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), broadly construed, have been made permanent.
It wasn’t a mistake.
😉 172.250.154.212 (talk) 15:07, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
- OK, but an edit suggesting she got her start writing fan fiction about a romance between Jesse Eisenberg and Andrew Garfield requires a reliable source.--Mojo Hand (talk) 15:10, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Merchandise giveaway nomination
|
A token of thanks
Hi Mojo Hand! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~
|
 |
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)