Wikipedia

User talk:Pigsonthewing/Archive 86

< User talk:Pigsonthewing
Latest comment: 7 years ago by MediaWiki message delivery in topic Administrators' newsletter – April 2017
Archive 80←Archive 84Archive 85Archive 86Archive 87Archive 88→Archive 90

The Bugle: Issue CXXXI, March 2017

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:20, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-11

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes this week

  • You will be able to show references from <references /> tags in more than one column on your wiki. This is the list of footnotes for the sources in the article. How many columns you see will depend on how big your screen is. On some wikis, some templates already do this. Templates that use <references /> tags will need to be updated, and then later the change can happen for all reference lists. [1][2]
  •   The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 14 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 15 March. It will be on all wikis from 16 March (calendar).

Meetings

  •   You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 14 March at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • Some old web browsers will not be able to use JavaScript on Wikimedia wikis in the future. If you have an old web browser on your computer you can upgrade to a newer version. [3]
  •   CSS in templates will be stored in a separate page in the future. [4][5]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:25, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #251

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Development
    • Converted undo/restore interface to use OOUI. You can test it here (phab:T134643).
    • Fixed an other rounding issue on geo coordinates (phab:T158772).
    • Added thumbnail images to the Wikimedia Commons suggester (phab:T160319).
    • Continued working on introducing Lexeme entity type.
    • Finishing federation prototype.
    • We are going to change all snak, reference, and qualifier hashes with the planned DataModel 7.0 release. If you are a tool developer, make sure you do not persist hashes, and never use them to request edits to entities. Statement IDs are safe (phab:T157965).
    • Removed unnecessary CSS on ooui special pages (phabricator:T159702)
    • Allowed example queries to be searched for SPARQL commands (phabricator:T154768)
    • Converted Wikibase interface for undoing/restoring a revision to OOUI (phabricator:T134643)
    • Converted image header user script to gadget (phabricator:T159929)
    • Started writing spec for technical data model for Wiktionary support (phabricator:T150785)
    • Worked on providing API for constraint check (phabricator:T102757)

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here.


weirdness

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thought this sort of edit [6] went out with the start of wikidata, .... um.... really weird. JarrahTree 14:23, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

synthesizer on "Summer 68"

Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi. In your book "Pink Floyd - The music and the mystery" (Omnibus Press, 2010) p.101, you assert the brass in Pink Floyd's "Summer 68" is played on a synthesizer. Surely this is a mistake? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:26, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: I'll need to consult my sources and notes, which I don't have to hand. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:06, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Cool, cheers. Reason I ask is I'm giving Atom Heart Mother a bit of spit and polish, as it's degraded a bit in the years since I last did serious work on it. I did grab your note about the working title of "One Night Stand" which I didn't know before. Re synths, I did have a look around for other book sources, such as Schaffner's "Saucerful of Secrets" and Povey's "Echoes", but nobody seems to really cover anything about the song beyond what's already in the article. In early 1970 the only synthesizers to hand were monophonic custom built or modular moogs. It's possible the brass is Wright overdubbed (he is documented as being a capable trombone player) or it's the EMI Pops Orchestra (who played on the Atom Heart Mother title track and did this session as a "job lot") or it's a Mellotron; for the latter case I'd go and ask Andy "Planet Mellotron" Thompson, but his website seems to be offline :-( Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:33, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Michael Cole

Latest comment: 7 years ago22 comments10 people in discussion

POTW, I also think Mohammed al-Fayed's former spokesman Michael Cole is notable enough for an article, but Cole has written about his travails over the former Wikipedia article for a certain newspaper/website which is developing a fixation on this project. I make it four M--- articles in the last ten days. By the way, Cole in that non-reliable source, appears unaware the article has been revived. And his commissioning editor too. Philip Cross (talk)

You created Michael Cole (public relations) yet a "Michael Cole" in the Daily Mail blasts Wikipedia about an article on him but it seems to be unrelated:

--Penbat (talk) 13:48, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm not POTW, but it is the same person. Checking the web, and possible variants (see the school's article), I found Cole's article is the main source indicating he went to Preston Manor County Grammar School; a common problem with people whose highest profile pre-dates the web is finding good sources. But note the point I make above. Philip Cross (talk) 14:12, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
The school is not mentioned in the article I wrote. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:25, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Don't believe everything you read in the Daily Mail. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:24, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Andy, have you read the deletion discussion for the earlier version of the Michael Cole article, including his letter to OTRS? Despite the dare I say typical exaggeration in the Daily Mail article, he comes across as quite reasonable and (being unable to read the deleted article) I found the deletion arguments reasonable. With the exception of the unfortunate "gnat's belly" phrasing, of course. Are you sure this is going to be worth the predictable emotion, and that it's not largely inherited notability? I'm surprised to see his company website still up, since he says in the letter that he wound it up and took the BBC position. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:52, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
I have not read, nor can I, any such OTRS correspondence. The deletion arguments to which you refer are not about the article I wrote. Cole clearly meets our notability requirements, and passes the minimum by quite a good margin. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:28, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Cole (public relations): OTRS correspondence evidently reproduced with permission. Julia\talk 10:32, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Note: The above comment has been modified, after I replied to it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:50, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I received an e-mail saying my comment had been partially oversighted, and waited for them to decide whether to oversight what's at the deletion discussion. There's a lengthy statement by the article subject reproduced there by permission in which he sounds reasonable, but which conflicts with what's on-line elsewhere and what you put in your replacement article. Hence my asking wether you'd read the deletion discussion. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:38, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

I have deleted the article per WP:G4. While your article was newly written, not a copy of the previous one, it changed nothing about the reason the previous one was deleted and didn't indicate sufficient additional notability or changed circumstancse to have the article now. Feel free to take this to WP:DRV instead to get the previous AfD overturned, but until then please don't recreate such articles. Fram (talk) 14:58, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

@Fram: Well, now please promptly undelete it. As I noted on the talk page, G4 explicitly excludes articles that "are not substantially identical to the deleted version". Your "please don't recreate such articles" is entirely outwith policy, and therefore rejected. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:05, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
An article deleted for BLP reasons, at the request of the article subject, should not be recreated without additional reasons to do so (the subject having gained further notability since the deletion). No such reasons were present here, so the article should not have been recreated. Fram (talk) 15:11, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
[ec] @Fram: Your claims are still outwith policy, but in any case are irrelevant, since I did have "additional reasons". Now please restore it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:14, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Oh, and FWIW, I have policy on my side: WP:BLPDELETE says "After the deletion, any administrator may choose to protect it against re-creation. Even if the page is not protected against re-creation, it should not be re-created unless a consensus is demonstrated in support of re-creation." (bolding mine).
G4 explicitly excludes articles that "are not substantially identical to the deleted version" (bolding mine). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:15, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Then replace G4 with G6 or IAR: the BLP policy trumps speedy deletion reasons. Anyway, like I said, feel free to take this to DRV to argue your case, the chance of you convincing me here that I should undelete this, contrary to BLPDELETE, is minimal. Fram (talk) 15:18, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Michael Cole (public relations)

 

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Michael Cole (public relations), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Nfitz (talk) 23:54, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I do chuckle whenever a highly experienced and knowledgeable editor is told to read "the guide to writing your first article". Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:27, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

BLP discretionary sanctions notification

 
This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

I'm making sure that you're aware that discretionary sanctions are applicable in this area, because you recreated the article Michael Cole (public relations) without first establishing a consensus for its recreation per WP:BLPDELETE. In my view that action was needlessly disruptive given the likely controversy that would result from recreating (without prior consensus) an article deleted at AfD following a request from the subject of that article. Sanctions may be imposed if you breach WP:BLPDELETE again. WJBscribe (talk) 12:03, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

(watching, alerted) I often recreate deleted articles, so would like to know for my safety: where would I have seen in this case or others that it was deleted per this WP:BLPDELETE. I believe that if it is not documented in the deletion log or the deletion discussion, users can not be held responsible for not knowing about it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:45, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
@WJBscribe: If you think I'm in breach of such sanctions, take it to Arbcom. Otherwise, keep your patronising advice to yourself. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:04, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm afraid that in this case, I have no choice in respect of the templating. ArbCom requires that precise template to be used to notify someone of the existence of discretionary sanctions and does not allow custom wording to be substituted. No sanction has yet been imposed on you. The notice was to inform you that sanctions may be imposed if you breach WP:BLPDELETE again. WJBscribe (talk) 13:40, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
"I have no choice in respect of the templating" Poppycock. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:43, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Weekly Summary #252

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here.


Tech News: 2017-12

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • The Save page button now says Publish page or Publish changes on the Wikimedia wikis except for Wikipedias and Wikinewses. This change will come to Wikipedias later. The point is to make it more clear that the edit will change the page immediately. Publish page is when you save a new page and Publish changes when you edit an existing page. [7]
  • DMOZ no longer works. Templates that use DMOZ can be redirected to archive.org or another mirror. DMOZ has been removed from the RelatedSites extension on Wikivoyage. [8]
  • You can see monthly page views when you click on Page information in the sidebar. Developers can also get monthly page views through the API. [9]
  • The Linter extension is now on smaller Wikimedia wikis. It helps editors find some wikitext errors so they can be fixed. It will come to other Wikimedia wikis later. The extension will be able to find more errors later. [10]
  •   The MediaWiki-Vagrant portable development environment has been updated to use Debian Jessie. This means local development and testing will be more like on the majority of Wikimedia production servers. [11]

Problems

  • On 15 March some interwiki links to other languages were not correctly sorted. This has been fixed. If you still see pages where the interwiki links are not sorted as they should be, they should be fixed automatically with time or you can edit the page and save it without changing anything. If this doesn't work, please report it. [12]

Changes this week

  • When you edit with the visual editor, you will be able to switch the direction you write in from right-to-left to left-to-right as you are editing. This is especially important for editors who edit in languages that write from right to left. You can do this with a tool in the editing menu. You can also use the keyboard shortcut Ctrl+Shift+X on PCs or Cmd+Shift+X on Macs. [13]
  •   The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 21 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 22 March. It will be on all wikis from 23 March (calendar).

Meetings

  •   You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 21 March at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

22:03, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:UK ISPs' Transparent Proxies

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

 Template:UK ISPs' Transparent Proxies has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:08, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #253

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

This is the Wikidata summary of the week before 2017-03-27.

  • Development
    • Fixing a bug that prevented users to edit descriptions in some non-latin alphabets (phab:T161263)
    • Worked on Special:NewLexeme which will be used to create new Lexemes for supporting lexicographical data (phabricator:T157973)
    • Aligned some more colors with Wikimedia color palete (phabricator:T151194)
    • Added more autocompletion for the Wikidata Query Service (phabricator:T150950)
    • Started working on support for Forms of words in the UI for supporting lexicographical data (phabricator:T160520)

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here.


Tech News: 2017-13

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • When you edit with the visual editor, you can see a visual diff as well as a wikitext diff when you review your changes. [14]

Problems

  • Special:AllPages was disabled for two days due to some performance issues. It is back, but the filter for redirects is gone as the cause of the performance problem. It still needs to be fixed. [15][16]

Changes this week

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

14:46, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Life Scientific, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Computer coding. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2017

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).

  Administrator changes

  TheDJ
  Xnuala • CJ • Oldelpaso • Berean Hunter • Jimbo Wales • Andrew c • Karanacs • Modemac • Scott

  Guideline and policy news

  • Following a discussion on the backlog of unpatrolled files, consensus was found to create a new user right for autopatrolling file uploads. Implementation progress can be tracked on Phabricator.
  • The BLPPROD grandfather clause, which stated that unreferenced biographies of living persons were only eligible for proposed deletion if they were created after March 18, 2010, has been removed following an RfC.
  • An RfC has closed with consensus to allow proposed deletion of files. The implementation process is ongoing.
  • After an unsuccessful proposal to automatically grant IP block exemption, consensus was found to relax the criteria for granting the user right from needing it to wanting it.

  Technical news

  • After a recent RfC, moved pages will soon be featured in a queue similar to Special:NewPagesFeed and require patrolling. Moves by administrators, page movers, and autopatrolled editors will be automatically marked as patrolled.
  • Cookie blocks have been deployed. This extends the current autoblock system by setting a cookie for each block, which will then autoblock the user if they switch accounts, even under a new IP.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:55, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Pigsonthewing/Archive_86&oldid=1083621790"