User talk:Tedder/Archive 14
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Tedder. 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 10 | ← | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
Administrators' newsletter – February 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2019).
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is currently open to reevaluate the activity requirements for administrators.
- Administrators who are blocked have the technical ability to block the administrator who blocked their own account. A recent request for comment has amended the blocking policy to clarify that this ability should only be used in exceptional circumstances, such as account compromises, where there is a clear and immediate need.
- A request for comment closed with a consensus in favor of deprecating The Sun as a permissible reference, and creating an edit filter to warn users who attempt to cite it.
Technical news
- A discussion regarding an overhaul of the format and appearance of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is in progress (permalink). The proposed changes will make it easier to create requests for those who are not using Twinkle. The workflow for administrators at this venue will largely be unchanged. Additionally, there are plans to archive requests similar to how it is done at WP:PERM, where historical records are kept so that prior requests can more easily be searched for.
Miscellaneous
- Voting in the 2019 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2019, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2019, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- A new IRC bot is available that allows you to subscribe to notifications when specific filters are tripped. This requires that your IRC handle be identified.
Oregon State University Black History Month Wikipedia Edit-a-thon, Friday, February 8
To commemorate Black History Month, Oregon State University, Wikimedia Nigeria, Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, and AfroCROWD are hosting a Wikipedia edit-a-thon at the Oregon State University Valley Library on Friday, February 8 from 2–5pm. The purpose of the event is to reduce Wikipedia's diversity gap by creating and improving articles about African American culture and history, as well as notable people of African descent and the African diaspora in general. Please visit here for more information. Remote participation is welcome! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:37, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
User Geek65535
Hi Tedder, regarding this user, I see you've manually added "extended confirmed" - please keep in mind this may allow them to violate certain arbcom restrictions without even knowing. This access level is not normally needed for new users (unlike 'confirmed' which can be very useful for people until they are autoconfirmed). I suggest reverting this, but if you feel strongly about it you should at least caution Geek65535 on how to avoid violating editing restrictions for users that don't have 500 edits and 30 days tenure. Best regards, — xaosflux Talk 16:31, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks- all I was trying to do is put them past '10 edits' so they could do uploads. tedder (talk) 17:30, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
PNCA Art+Feminism Wikipedia Editathon, Saturday, March 9
The Pacific Northwest College of Art (PNCA) is hosting a Wikipedia edit-a-thon in the Shipley Collins Mediatheque (511 NW Broadway) on Saturday, March 9 from 10am – 2:30pm. This is a free community event designed to teach people to add and edit information about cis and transgender women and nonbinary folks to Wikipedia. We'll have training sessions, artist talks, snacks, free childcare, and plenty of exciting energy and collaboration! You're welcome to drop in any time during the event. Participants are encouraged to bring their own laptops and charging cables, though if you are not able, computer stations will be available. Please visit this link for more information. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:02, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2019).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- The RfC on administrator activity requirements failed to reach consensus for any proposal.
- Following discussions at the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and Wikipedia talk:Administrators, an earlier change to the restoration of adminship policy was reverted. If requested, bureaucrats will not restore administrator permissions removed due to inactivity if there have been five years without a logged administrator action; this "five year rule" does not apply to permissions removed voluntarily.
Technical news
- A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.
Arbitration
- The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
- paid-en-wp
wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing. - checkuser-en-wp wikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.
- paid-en-wp
- The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
Miscellaneous
- Following the 2019 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Base, Einsbor, Jon Kolbert, Schniggendiller, and Wim b.
International Women's Day Wikipedia Edit-a-thon, Oregon Jewish Museum, Thursday, March 7
The Oregon Jewish Museum and Center for Holocaust Education, in partnership with social practice artist Shoshana Gugenheim and as part of the Art+Feminism Project, will host the 2nd Annual International Women's Day Wikipedia Edit-a-thon to edit and/or create Wikipedia articles for Jewish women artists. The event will be held at the museum on Thursday, March 7 from 4 to 8 pm. Pre-registration is preferred but not required. Members of the public are invited to come to the museum to learn about the editing process, its history, its impact, and how to do it. We aim to collaboratively edit/enter 18 Jewish women artists into the canon. Support will be provided by an experienced local Wikipedian who will be on site to teach and guide the process. This edit-a-thon will serve as both a public art action and a public educational program. Participants will have an opportunity to select an artist/s ahead of time or on site.
Please visit this link and the meetup page for more information. Thanks! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:25, 5 March 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 02:27, 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 21:04, 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.
Do you do this often?
I just now noticed your action of 25 April 2011 "blank old attack page" and adding a noindex. Do you make a distinction between 'attack' and 'evidence'?
Did you not see references to an RFC? Wikipedia:Requests for comment/TheKingOfDixie TheKingOfDixie (talk · contribs) These notes were added to that RFC, created by another editor. That the RFC did not get traction is fine. That the problem user stopped editing was good also.
If you had blanked the page with most any other summary, (perhaps "blank old unneeded text"?) that would have been fine. It was quite 'dated' material. Notification would have been nice also.
As it is, "blank old attack page" is itself an attack, or at least would be in these hypersensitive days. (What's the question at ANI - "is 'busybody' an attack?") I can hope you didn't do this to anyone else, and wouldn't in the future.
I'll be taking out the noindex and reusing the page for the latest kerfluffle involving recent IPs of Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Fangusu. Shenme (talk) 01:10, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
- Do I do it often? Likewise, do I remember what I knew of the context to that from 8 years ago? No to both. tedder (talk) 05:00, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
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.
Administrators' newsletter – July 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).
Administrator changes
- 28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam1 • Flyguy649 • Fram2 • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe
- 1Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
- 2Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.
|
|
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment seeking to alleviate pressures on the request an account (ACC) process proposes either raising the account creation limit for extended confirmed editors or granting the account creator permission on request to new ACC tool users.
- In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.
- The scope of CSD criterion G8 has been tightened such that the only redirects that it now applies to are those which target non-existent pages.
- The scope of CSD criterion G14 has been expanded slightly to include orphan "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects that target pages that are not disambiguation pages or pages that perform a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).
- A request for comment seeks to determine whether Wikipedia:Office actions should be a policy page or an information page.
Technical news
- 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. Community feedback is invited.
Miscellaneous
- In February 2019, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) changed its office actions policy to include temporary and project-specific bans. The WMF exercised this new ability for the first time on the English Wikipedia on 10 June 2019 to temporarily ban and desysop Fram. This action has resulted in significant community discussion, a request for arbitration (permalink), and, either directly or indirectly, the resignations of numerous administrators and functionaries. The WMF Board of Trustees is aware of the situation, and discussions continue on a statement and a way forward. The Arbitration Committee has sent an open letter to the WMF Board.
The article James Scott Brown has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
NN - nothing approaching substantial coverage.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Tagishsimon (talk) 13:24, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
- For the record, I'm okay with this. I'd prefer to let the prod play out rather than speedying it under G7, though. User:Tagishsimon (talk · contribs) tedder (talk) 02:40, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago
 | |
| Ten years! |
|---|
Administrators' newsletter – August 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, the page Wikipedia:Office actions has been changed from a policy page to an information page.
- A request for comment (permalink) is in progress regarding the administrator inactivity policy.
Arbitration
- Editors may now use the template {{Ds/aware}} to indicate that they are aware that discretionary sanctions are in force for a topic area, so it is unnecessary to alert them.
Miscellaneous
- Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
- The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.
Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.
Administrators' newsletter – September 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).
Administrator changes
Bradv • Chetsford • Izno
Floquenbeam • Lectonar- DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
- Callanecc • Fox • HJ Mitchell • LFaraone • There'sNoTime
Technical news
- Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
- The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.
Arbitration
- A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2019 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
Miscellaneous
- A global request for comment is in progress regarding whether a user group should be created that could modify edit filters across all public Wikimedia wikis.
Administrators' newsletter – October 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which
applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories
.
- Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which
Technical news
- As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.
Arbitration
- The 2019 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place October 4th to 10th.
- The arbitration case regarding Fram was closed. While there will be a local RfC
focus[ing] on how harassment and private complaints should be handled in the future
, there is currently a global community consultation on partial and temporary office actions in response to the incident. It will be open until October 30th.
Miscellaneous
- The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.
Administrators' newsletter – November 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC was closed with the consensus that the resysop criteria should be made stricter.
- The follow-up RfC to develop that change is now open at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 Resysop Criteria (2).
- A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.
Arbitration
- Eligible editors may now nominate themselves as candidates for the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections. The self-nomination period will close November 12, with voting running from November 19 through December 2.
regarding Marcelo Hochman
Regarding the below: The reference page which you've mentioned doesn't even exist. May i know why you still deleted it without even checking the URL?
This page has been deleted. The deletion, protection, and move log for the page are provided below for reference.
07:05, 27 October 2009 Tedder talk contribs deleted page Marcelo Hochman (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.hemangiomatreatment.com/about.jsp) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.227.131.212 (talk)
- Note the date is 10 years ago. It was an exact copy/paste of that website at the time. Probably has notability issues too. tedder (talk) 16:59, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
| | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).
Administrator changes
- EvergreenFir • ToBeFree
- Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂
CheckUser changes
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC on the administrator resysop criteria was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new request for adminship is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally, Bureaucrats are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.
- Following a proposal, the edit filter mailing list has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.
Technical news
- Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry. A new page, MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry-ip, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. (T219126)
Arbitration
- Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.
Miscellaneous
- The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF
will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive
.
- The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF
Please join us for our Cascadia Wikimedians annual meeting, Monday, December 23, 5:30pm PST
|
Please join us for our Cascadia Wikimedians annual meeting, Monday, December 23, 5:30pm PST. You can join us virtually from your PC, Mac, Linux, iOS, or Android at this link: https://virginia.zoom.us/my/wikilgbt. The address of the physical meeting is: Capitol Hill Meeting Room at Capitol Hill Library (425 Harvard Ave. E., Seattle, WA 98102) 47°37′23″N 122°19′22″W / 47.622928°N 122.322912°W
The event page is here. You do not have to be a member to attend, but only members can vote in board elections. New members may join in person by completing the membership registration form onsite or (to be posted) online and paying $5 for a calendar year / $0.50 per month for the remainder of a year. Current members may renew for 2019 at the meeting as well.
|
Administrators' newsletter – January 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment asks whether partial blocks should be enabled on the English Wikipedia. If enabled, this functionality would allow administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces, rather than the entire site.
- A proposal asks whether admins who don't use their tools for a significant period of time (e.g. five years) should have the toolset procedurally removed.
- Following a successful RfC, a whitelist is now available for users whose redirects will be autopatrolled by a bot, removing them from the new pages patrol queue. Admins can add such users to Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist after a discussion following the guidelines at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist.
Arbitration
- The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being
the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted
rather thanreasonably construed
. - Following the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Bradv, Casliber, David Fuchs, DGG, KrakatoaKatie, Maxim, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy, Worm That Turned, Xeno.
- The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being
Miscellaneous
- This issue marks three full years of the Admin newsletter. Thanks for reading!
Discussion at Talk:The Bewdley School#Full Protection
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:The Bewdley School#Full Protection. Take a look please Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:07, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
- The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with
wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input
. No proposed process received consensus.
Technical news
- Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
- When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [1]
Arbitration
- Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators
that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.
- Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators
Miscellaneous
- Voting in the 2020 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2020, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2020, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- The English Wikipedia has reached six million articles. Thank you everyone for your contributions!
Universities vs Colleges
Please join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Universities#Requested_move_18_January_2020 before the discussion is closed. The outcome could affect the way the WP:WPSCH project works and may incur some changes that would need to be made. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:59, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks @Kudpung: for giving me a chance to read and evaluate this. tedder (talk) 15:44, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops
must not
undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather thanshould not
. - A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.
- Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops
Technical news
- Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.
Miscellaneous
- Following the 2020 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: BRPever, Krd, Martin Urbanec, MusikAnimal, Sakretsu, Sotiale, and Tks4Fish. There are a total of seven editors that have been appointed as stewards, the most since 2014.
- The 2020 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Ajraddatz and Uzoma Ozurumba; they will serve for one year.
Contribute to I Don't Speak German-related page?
Hi Tedder! I saw that you started the I Don't Speak German page, and I was wondering whether you'd be interested in collaborating on a new page or providing a lookover once I finish drafting it. The new page is for User:Jlevi/Tom Kawcyznski, an individual who was the subject of a recent IDSG episode.
If you'd like to collaborate, please feel free to edit. If you'd be willing to edit, I can give you a shout once the article is closer to prime-time.
Thanks for your work on the IDSG page, and thanks for considering pitching in with a new article! Jlevi (talk) 19:30, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- You're welcome on IDSG. I'll have to listen to the 'Tom' episode, and yeah, looks like there are more sources out there for him. Hit me up when you are done making major edits and I'll take a turn (eg adding sources and doing minor rewriting). tedder (talk) 19:47, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- Sounds great! I'll write a reminder to let you know once I've added most of my content to the page. Thanks! Jlevi (talk) 20:13, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hey @Tedder:! I'm mostly done with my edits. Please do take a look at the page and add or modify any content you see fit. And please feel free to heavily edit what I've written--I'm still figuring out the right balancing act for BLPs.Jlevi (talk) 00:22, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
- Sounds great! I'll write a reminder to let you know once I've added most of my content to the page. Thanks! Jlevi (talk) 20:13, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Recent edit
You recently added a chart to 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Virginia. This addition is redundant since the chart already existed in the article's Statistics section. I reverted some vandalism to the county-statistics chart and your edit got caught up in that reversion but unless you object I would like to leave the article as it stands now. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 03:15, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Yep, I was confused at first, but after scrolling down I saw it. Apologies. tedder (talk) 04:04, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- No worries, these are strange times for all of us. Take care, Shearonink (talk) 05:05, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Barnstar of Diligence |
| Thank you for creating Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data/United States/Florida medical cases chart. I have been thinking all week about how something like this is needed, but you actually had the motivation to make it. Well done! - MrX 🖋 18:25, 26 March 2020 (UTC) |
- Thanks! I was inspired after we got the one going for Oregon. tedder (talk) 18:27, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
- I think it's great. I would like to update the number of deaths based on daily reporting from the Florida DOH. Do you have any objections to that? - MrX 🖋 10:32, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- Never mind, it looks like you already did it. There is a wrapping issue that I would like to try to fix though. - MrX 🖋 10:34, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
- I think it's great. I would like to update the number of deaths based on daily reporting from the Florida DOH. Do you have any objections to that? - MrX 🖋 10:32, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
Bot edits
You have recently made a large number of edits claiming to be a bot edit. Please note that per the bot policy only approved bots are allowed. If you continue with this editing without further approval your account will be blocked. Please note that even editing like a bot is seriously frowned upon. Primefac (talk) 00:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- I've run full bots in the past- I won't be running this one automated. I'm using it to generate single rows and recalculate divisors (example). Manual edits take about one minute- I don't think that's unreasonable. tedder (talk) 03:16, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
- It's not unreasonable, but I was alerted to your editing and just thought I would remind you that unapproved bots (fast or not) are not allowed. If you're using your own account, then you shouldn't be saying it's a bot running things. Primefac (talk) 14:34, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.
Technical news
- There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.
Arbitration
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a
Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment
. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a
Miscellaneous
- The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.
Muntjac
Hello. You have recently removed an edit I made to the page for Muntjac (deer) about the origins of the false alternative name of 'Mastreani deer', which was a mischievous amendment made to Wikipedia on the 23 Oct 2011. This is easily verified by reviewing the edit history for the page. This misinformation has since then proliferated across the Internet and the Wikipedia entry was clearly the origin. Can my edit be reinstated please? Many thanks.Charles S-J (talk) 09:56, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hi @Charles S-J:, Wikipedia shouldn't be used as a source for itself, and it's hard to imagine that a mistaken edit is a worthy addition. If, for instance, the mistake had made it into peer-reviewed papers, that would be more significant. tedder (talk) 10:40, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- Discretionary sanctions have been authorized for all pages and edits related to COVID-19, to be logged at WP:GS/COVID19.
- Following a recent discussion on Meta-Wiki, the edit filter maintainer global group has been created.
- A request for comment has been proposed to create a new main page editor usergroup.
- A request for comment has been proposed to make the bureaucrat activity requirements more strict.
Technical news
- The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. You can review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page.
- Enterprisey created a script that will show a link to the proper Special:Undelete page when viewing a since-deleted revision, see User:Enterprisey/link-deleted-revs.
Miscellaneous
- A request for comment closed with consensus to create a Village Pump-style page for communication with the Wikimedia Foundation.
Not willing to talk about it?
Please don't assume. When you edited on my talk page, you elected not to read, or if you read it, you ignored, the edit notice that says "If you're here to tell me about an edit of yours that I reverted, please explain why it should be included on the article's talk page." You decided to continue to discuss things on my talk page instead of the article's. That's your problem. You also didn't read the article which called Leonard William Armstrong, the Grand Dragon of the Tennessee White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, yet in your edit summary you refer to him as "the "Grand Wizard of the KKK". So we're talking about the leader of a regional branch of the KKK, not the leader of the national organization, and we're not sure how prominent that branch was, or the leader within the branch. So it makes sense that it's a WP:REDLINK, doesn't it? But if you want to carry on a discussion about it, move this discussion to Talk:Jonathan David Brown or start the article per WP:WTAF. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:01, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
- Feel free to clean up, rather than be pedantic. tedder (talk) 00:02, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Veritone edits clarification
Hi there - You have recently removed edits I made to the page about Veritone. The edits were related to compensation for Veritone's CEO and President. There's a level of nuance with how executive compensation is calculated. If that nuance isn't explained through the inclusion of the additional details, it leads to a misrepresentation of the information. These details can be verified by referencing Veritone's 10k, which was filed in April 2020. Can my edits be reinstated please? Many thanks.. 97.113.228.201 (talk) 19:12, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
- Hi IP- the page currently has "salary and options", which is a much better way than the misrepresentation that was in NYTimes. It seems like tranches and goals is an excessive amount of information, that's what I removed. If you disagree, perhaps explain on Talk:Veritone, we can get some consensus from other editors. tedder (talk) 19:30, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
Haha
Commenting here with no special reason, just wanted to thank you for making my day, your userpage is fantastic 😂😂🤣 Zoglophie (talk) 05:38, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Fatih Ozmen edits
Hi - thanks for your edits in Fatih Ozmen. I recently came across this page, and it is very similar to the page about his spouse Eren Ozmen. If you have the energy, that page could use improvement as well. And I'm wondering if these really deserve their own pages, or should we just merge with Sierra Nevada Corporation... --ZimZalaBim talk 03:12, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks. I just discovered them too, and they all have similar problems, it seems. Certainly the two Ozmen pages could be merged, I think SNC is big enough that it makes sense for Ozmen to be spun out, though it is a bit borderline. tedder (talk) 03:23, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
US Auto Parts compensation
Hi, I saw you added compensation information about only one of the people listed on U.S. Auto Parts Network. When reviewing other companies I noticed nobody lists that info for other companies as it's not that relevant. His compensation looks within industry standard for a public company that size and if there was a reason to add it in Wikipedia it would make more sense to create a page for him and add it there. What are your thoughts? Findhistroy (talk) 02:31, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- It's perfect content for a corporate page, it gives context to revenue- and as the news has shown lately, it's especially relevant for companies that have taken public loans. tedder (talk) 03:12, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- Although compensation may have some slight relevance to the PPP loan, it doesn't provide that relevance the way it is written now and feels more like an opinion. Those loans were taken based on seeing the downside risk as sales drastically declined and to make sure to keep American workers still working. If you look at the other references, they have since returned the loan once they saw business returned and they no longer saw the downside risk they expected. IMO, I would say compensation is only important when it's hugely out of ordinary from all other companies that size. Findhistroy (talk) 20:46, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
- There's a reason public companies are required to file compensation information anymore. It isn't purient to include, nor is it only included related to PPP. If you are motivated for its removal, it'd be a great thing to discuss on the article talk page and list with WP:THIRD. tedder (talk) 23:37, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. I think I'm not that attached to my optionion yet. I have other peges to make edits to for now as I'm still learning wikipedia edits. Thanks for the discussion though. I appreciate your feedback. Findhistroy (talk) 18:10, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- There's a reason public companies are required to file compensation information anymore. It isn't purient to include, nor is it only included related to PPP. If you are motivated for its removal, it'd be a great thing to discuss on the article talk page and list with WP:THIRD. tedder (talk) 23:37, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
- Although compensation may have some slight relevance to the PPP loan, it doesn't provide that relevance the way it is written now and feels more like an opinion. Those loans were taken based on seeing the downside risk as sales drastically declined and to make sure to keep American workers still working. If you look at the other references, they have since returned the loan once they saw business returned and they no longer saw the downside risk they expected. IMO, I would say compensation is only important when it's hugely out of ordinary from all other companies that size. Findhistroy (talk) 20:46, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).
Administrator changes
- CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
- Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment asks whether the Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS) should allowed any unblock request or just private appeals.
- The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.
Arbitration
Nomination of James Bodenstedt for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article James Bodenstedt is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Bodenstedt until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jerod Lycett (talk) 22:05, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Surgisphere
Sorry, I was making a small edit and it seems that when I saved my edit it overwrote yours. Please revert my edit so that you’re is reinstated. The only edit I wanted was to add authors to the article which has none. “first1=Kelly|last1=Servick|first2=Martin|last2=Enserink “ BoonDock (talk) 05:49, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- Sounds good- I'll try to merge them together a bit. tedder (talk) 05:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
I removed the following reference which makes claims that are not correct: https://drquay.com/hydroxychloroquine-political-science/. "If you look at an outcome like arrhythmias or death and you have two input variables, one variable is being on a ventilator and the other is taking HCQ, you have no way to know which caused the outcomes." That is not correct - ventilator was used as an output variable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:14c:154:8d99:b8b4:6974:3bea:59b5 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 7 June 2020 UTC (UTC)
- Do you have a reliable source on this, not just your view of it? This sort of thing is best discussed on the article talk page, Talk:Surgisphere. tedder (talk) 16:44, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll add a discussion there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:14C:154:8D99:309B:AFBA:8C00:F341 (talk) 17:10, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Sarah Iannarone
At Sarah Iannarone you've added some comments by people about Sarah Iannarone, but withou context it's difficult to know who those people are. Is it possible to add a brief description or name of publication? Thanks.Djflem (talk) 08:44, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- of course. Feel free to do so, it I'll take a stab at it when I can. tedder (talk) 10:45, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Djflem: done! It also made me figure out one of the links wasn't dabbed. tedder (talk) 16:52, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Don't have access to this: https://www.newsbreak.com/new-york/oswego/municipal/0O8s2Ngs/oswego-waterfront-commission-established-by-mayor-billy-barlow Anything interesting? Djflem (talk) 23:05, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- I clicked in and was able to see it, "The nine-member commission will be chaired by former Oswego Mayor John Sullivan Junior." Just a little blurb, no reference to Iannarone or really anything I found interesting. What were you thinking it might have? tedder (talk) 00:18, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ah- googling their names I see they appear on some newsbreak stories, but it's not because they are related other than the headline being featured in the sidebar or something. The headline is this one, newsbreak must just republish some stuff. tedder (talk) 00:20, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Djflem: aaaand I created News Break for the company. tedder (talk) 02:52, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- I thought I saw something with Iannarone being on the commission or advisory board.Djflem (talk) 05:38, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Djflem: aaaand I created News Break for the company. tedder (talk) 02:52, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ah- googling their names I see they appear on some newsbreak stories, but it's not because they are related other than the headline being featured in the sidebar or something. The headline is this one, newsbreak must just republish some stuff. tedder (talk) 00:20, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Surgisphere
I tried my best to clean up the article but the whole Surgisphere saga is really just a trainwreck I cannot look away from Mfernflower (talk) 03:45, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- It is, so much. And it expands into many individuals. BTW I had the Ars quote simply because we can't say "X is a horrible person", but we can say "M says X is sketchy". I wasn't going to say anything, nor am I going to revert it- just giving context. tedder (talk) 03:51, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Non-free images
Friendly reminder that non-free images need a separate rationale for each article in which they're used (in this case, Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association and File:Jim Goldman and Elian Gonzalez.jpg). Wikiacc (¶) 14:23, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
- Aha- thanks. I didn't even bother looking at the description to see its license. Thanks for pulling it. tedder (talk) 15:35, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
- No problem. Wikiacc (¶) 00:20, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is in progress to remove the T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) speedy deletion criterion.
Technical news
- Protection templates on mainspace pages are now automatically added by User:MusikBot II (BRFA).
Arbitration
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an
RfC regarding on-wiki harassment
. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community. - The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for
all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles
.
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an
Nomination of News Break for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article News Break is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/News Break until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Praxidicae (talk) 13:36, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – August 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2020).
Administrator changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- There is an open request for comment to decide whether to increase the minimum duration a sanction discussion has to remain open (currently 24 hours).
- Speedy deletion criterion T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) has been repealed following a request for comment.
- Speedy deletion criterion X2 (pages created by the content translation tool) has been repealed following a discussion.
- There is a proposal to restrict proposed deletion to confirmed users.
Nomination of Michael Strickland (blogger) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael Strickland (blogger) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Strickland (blogger) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mz7 (talk) 15:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Duck Creek Energy moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, Duck Creek Energy, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- I disagree, but mostly replying to ping @Chris Capoccia: who helped and split this from AquaSalina. Chris, perhaps we should just merge it back together? tedder (talk) 15:13, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- I don't know where else you want citations. I added two more. It's not that hard. I've seen lots worse not get moved to draftspace. — Chris Capoccia 💬 01:11, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- I moved it back. @UnitedStatesian:, if you disagree, which is fine, please take it to AFD instead. tedder (talk) 03:55, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
- I don't know where else you want citations. I added two more. It's not that hard. I've seen lots worse not get moved to draftspace. — Chris Capoccia 💬 01:11, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
Tedder Violating Ethics and Principles
Why are you violating a reputation management page. You have ties to the industry obviously if you are making such false and defamatory edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johndarerisascammer (talk • contribs) 06:55, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- I think you meant to talk on Talk:Profile Defenders. You might want to stick with factual claims. I'm curious what "violating ethics and principles" means, but start at Wikipedia's 5 pillars and then explain. tedder (talk) 07:05, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
William Ziegler Jr.
Really glad you created his article. I have an enormous number of files on various people etc. associated with Thoroughbred racing, each filled with an assortment of info picked up here and there as I do research on someone else. Hence, doing a new article with that info collection is a fair amount of work and because I have so many files, they often get forgotten. So, when someone such as you creates the article, it then reminds and motivates me to help fill in. So, my sincere appreciation is extended for your effort. Stretchrunner (talk) 16:09, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks! Yeah, same thing, though my interests came from a different direction. It's really nice to combine two stubs into one person like you did :) I created William Ziegler, Jr. as a redir once I saw you began to work on it, and then looked at LinksHere and saw this page was redlinking to that. So FYI to get that page on your radar. Blew my mind when I saw a connection to Helen Keller too. tedder (talk) 18:29, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, the minimum length for site ban discussions was increased to 72 hours, up from 24.
- A request for comment is ongoing to determine whether paid editors
must
orshould
use the articles for creation process. - A request for comment is open to resolve inconsistencies between the draftification and alternative to deletion processes.
Arbitration
- A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2020 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
- An open request for comment asks whether active Arbitrators may serve on the Trust and Safety Case Review Committee or Ombudsman commission.
Citizens of the American Republic
Hi Tedder. You placed a notice on the talk page of Citizens of the American Republic notifying users that the article is under 1RR page editing restrictions, but you did not add an edit notice and you did not log it. I've never seen a brand new article place under 1RR shortly after its creation. Was this an error? - MrX 🖋 00:51, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Tedder, could I please get a response on this? Thank you. - MrX 🖋 16:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for re-pinging me. It got lost in my notifications. I was under the belief that any recent political article could be added to the arb sanctions by an admin- am I wrong? I'd added it since it was under the political umbrella of We Build The Wall, which had sanctions the in the first talk page edit, and isn't on the list either: Wikipedia:Arbitration_enforcement_log#American_politics_2. tedder (talk) 16:53, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- It's a bit complicated, but I will try to explain. Any edit to post-1932 American politics articles is automatically subject to discretionary sanctions per WP:ARBAPDS. There is a general template that reminds editors of discretionary sanctions that can be placed on article talk pages, but I can't find it at the moment.
- Separately, articles can be placed under editing restrictions if an admin believes that an article may experience problems due to poor editor conduct. In such a case, the restrictions have to be placed in an page edit notice, and they have to be logged at WP:AELOG. Admins will also usually place the Template:American politics AE on the talk page as you did. The requirements are more succinctly explained in the template documentation:
IMPORTANT: When applying this banner to a talk page, it is required to also add {{American politics AE/Edit notice}} as an edit notice to the main article. Failure to do so renders the restrictions ineffective. Page restrictions must also be logged at the arbitration enforcement log.
- Yes, it's very bureaucratic (thank you Arbcom), but I hope this explanation helps. - MrX 🖋 17:20, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation. I could come up with about five ways to understand it. I think one of those was correct. I'll remove it from C.A.R. for the reasons you've stated- and again, thanks for helping clarify! (edit: also removed it from Guo Wengui and Brian Kolfage, which I'd added around the same time.) tedder (talk) 20:10, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for re-pinging me. It got lost in my notifications. I was under the belief that any recent political article could be added to the arb sanctions by an admin- am I wrong? I'd added it since it was under the political umbrella of We Build The Wall, which had sanctions the in the first talk page edit, and isn't on the list either: Wikipedia:Arbitration_enforcement_log#American_politics_2. tedder (talk) 16:53, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Reverting My Assessment of the WPIR Rating of Talk:Elián González
Tedder Hi! I see you reverted my WPIR rating of this page. May I ask why? FYI, this is one of those I thought long and hard about for Mid category. However, on WPIR rating I am considering all of Modern History and a global perspective. The only reason I would allocate it a Mid is because it may have influenced the outcome of a recent US presidential election. I could give it a Mid for that. What do you think? Johncdraper (talk) 16:26, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hey @Johncdraper:! I was browsing my watchlist while mobile and accidentally hit 'rollback'. I immediately rolled that back, though, so it has your settings. I need to experiment with my mobile watchlist settings more. Sorry for the gaslighting it caused :/ tedder (talk) 21:30, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Need Some Help
I saw that you set up a redirection link from US Auto Parts Network to CarParts.com. I'm not sure what the process is but would you mind helping move the CarParts.com logo link from Wikipedia to the Wikimedia one? Findhistroy (talk) 19:21, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Hey Findhistroy, I don't think the logo is a good fit on Wikimedia, because Carparts probably owns the logo (it has a trademark symbol, if nothing else). Sometimes things are easier to do on Wikipedia because it's based on mostly US laws; fair use rationale doesn't mean much on Wikimedia. tedder (talk) 07:07, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks Tedder, I was thinking the same thing at first but then in my review of company logos on Wikimedia under the category Logos of electronic commerce websites led me to believe otherwise. Additionally I noticed that Wikipedia tends to pull from Wikimedia for the image when you are on the main Wikipedia landing page and are typing in a search term. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia so if I'm wrong in this respect then that's fine. I guess I would like to know how to make it pull the image as part of the search suggestions. I'm also looking to improve that in general for other search terms so help would be greatly appreciated. Findhistroy (talk) 22:55, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Welcome Mohananad Bhatti (talk) 22:40, 27 September 2020 (UTC) |
Huh?
- context: Bill Wackermann
Could you explain “Reverted 4 edits by Gleeanon409 (talk): WP:SOCK of earlier "I am Bill" edit? Removing the same content, removing sourced material.” Gleeanon 03:56, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- I just reverted myself after wikistalking you a bit, which turned up the BLPN discussion. Without context it looked the same as the earlier edits. Apologies. tedder (talk) 03:57, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- To avoid having it sprawl elsewhere (though I can go to the article page if you prefer), you removed this link, which gave a cite for the final article in the page. I'm curious why. @Gleeanon409:. tedder (talk) 04:01, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- New York Post aka Page Six is listed as an unreliable source on the perennial sources list. Gleeanon 04:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Gotcha- and I see it on WP:RSP now. I'll put a cn tag on that last bit. tedder (talk) 04:09, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- No problem. Gleeanon 04:20, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Gotcha- and I see it on WP:RSP now. I'll put a cn tag on that last bit. tedder (talk) 04:09, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- New York Post aka Page Six is listed as an unreliable source on the perennial sources list. Gleeanon 04:06, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- To avoid having it sprawl elsewhere (though I can go to the article page if you prefer), you removed this link, which gave a cite for the final article in the page. I'm curious why. @Gleeanon409:. tedder (talk) 04:01, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks!...
... for uploading several images of the toppled Harvey Scott statue. I was planning to take some photographs as well, if my schedule allows, but probably the statue will be removed altogether before I can get there. Glad you were able to document the toppling. Hope I didn't step on your toes updating the article. We'll see if RACC plans to re-install or replace all these toppled statues. Thanks again! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:30, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Indeed, I wanted to get up there and capture some history. I knew when I added the uncited content it would need to be written up but I wanted to get it up there quickly too. That's why I put the pic at the top. I have a funny/tragic story about going up there this morning but only via email. tedder (talk) 18:03, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
WP:OR policy on image caption?
I am curious how WP:OR is applicable on image caption. Someone else objected to my image caption previously asserting WP:OR, however, from the way you're using caption, it seems like it's a tolerated practice. If the picture itself does not serve as a source, then how much are editors allowed to say about things that is not directly verified by the image? Just as example, your image says "Protest sign complaining about Wheeler's use of violence during the protests" but the image itself doesn't convey what the purpose is, but shows that person holding a sign that says "Ted you did this". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Wheeler#/media/File:George_Floyd_police_brutality_protests_-_Portland_Oregon_-_July_22_-_tedder_-_Ted_Wheeler_sign_-_HEY_TED_YOU_DID_THIS.png Graywalls (talk) 16:02, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hmm. I don't know if an image can (if/should) be used as a source. I tag my images based on what I see. I'd think there are reliable sources that can back up the general attitude given in the image. Can you share a diff where it was objected to? tedder (talk) 22:17, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Alliance Charter Academy
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 Alliance Charter Academy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
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 deleted 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. // Timothy :: talk 06:18, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of Alliance Charter Academy for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alliance Charter Academy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alliance Charter Academy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. // Timothy :: talk 06:21, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of Childs Way Charter School for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Childs Way Charter School is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Childs Way Charter School until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. // Timothy :: talk 06:24, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Nomination of Eddyville Charter School for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Eddyville Charter School is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eddyville Charter School until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. // Timothy :: talk 06:26, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
| | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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 |
Your name for attributing copyright of photos released on wikipedia
if you would please post your full legal name so proper attribution can be made to photos you uploaded and released via cc 4.0. thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.240.165.243 (talk) 08:32, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- You can use `tedder`. Feel free to contact me via email if necessary. tedder (talk) 12:43, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Please reverse full page protection on Lauren Boebert
WP:ADMINACCT suggests I should bring any objections of your administrative actions directly to you. I have raised objection to full page protection on Talk:Lauren_Boebert. My objection is basically this: It's heavy handed, especially in light of the protection level of similarly controversial biographies of living persons. Im happy to discuss this in any forum, but my personal preference would be on Talk:Lauren_Boebert, where it would find a larger interested audience. Rklahn (talk) 06:23, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for bringing it here, it could go to WP:ANI or elesewhere, but this is good for a start. At this point .. what's being lost? There aren't a bunch of edit requests stacking up. There were at last four editors who have warning over the ~dozen revdels. (that "four" doesn't including the person who reverted, of course. When random long term users are going well over the BLP line, it isn't a case like blocking new users, or taking out one problematic user. I have reasons for the length of time but there's a bit of a tempest in a tea pot here. What's the proof that it is causing a problem? It's not taking over CAT:EDITREQ or a list of them on the talk page. tedder (talk) 07:08, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- In all seriousness, you risk becoming the poster child for why we desysop admins who don't stay active. You don't understand protection policy, think that because an article isn't "taking over CAT:EDITREQ" it's OK to keep it full protected, don't know how to read a revdel log, and don't even seem to know what ANI is for. Again pinging Drmies to see this gem as well. EEng 14:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- Never post on my talk page again, eeng. It's shameful that you think such personal attacks are appropriate on Wikipedia. tedder (talk) 16:04, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- EEng, while full protection is extraordinary, in this case it's not a bad idea and I accept tedder's rationale. I also find it amazing that longterm editors added such obviously BLP-violating material (I know you have better sense than that), and wasn't sure what to do about it--maybe some edit notice might work, but then you're drawing attention to the actual material. All this will blow over in a few days or weeks, and the protection isn't for very long. Please don't yell at tedder, who I know as a perfectly reasonable administrator. In fact, they are one of only a few editors in whose honor I wrote an article: Tedder. tedder, EEng's comment came, I'm sure, in the heat of the moment. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 16:10, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- Indeed- the rationale I tend towards in these cases is that it's better to protect a page after more than two long-standing editors have been warring, because it's better to page protect than, say, blocking three or four users. There's a long essay for this, but it comes from the idea that semi-protect is for IPs, edit warring between longstanding editors leads to bad places, and articles near sanctioned subjects and BLP and undiscussed edit warring are all concerns. (ah, the days that I had time to work on RFPP) tedder (talk) 21:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- In all seriousness, you risk becoming the poster child for why we desysop admins who don't stay active. You don't understand protection policy, think that because an article isn't "taking over CAT:EDITREQ" it's OK to keep it full protected, don't know how to read a revdel log, and don't even seem to know what ANI is for. Again pinging Drmies to see this gem as well. EEng 14:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
tedder thanks for your recognition that a contrary consensus developed, your reconsideration and reversal. I appreciate the civil approach, especially in the light of the comments of others. Rklahn (talk) 17:54, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Nearman
In the same vein, I'm pretty sure you can't use your admin tools and edit content at the same time as you did at Michael Nearman. Valeince (talk) 20:57, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- Was there a dispute that I was blatantly involved with on the page? Or simply having coincidental edits? See WP:PREFER. tedder (talk) 21:43, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- I looked at WP:PREFER and saw this last paragraph: "Administrators who have made substantive content changes to an article are considered involved and must not use their advanced permissions to further their own positions. When involved in a dispute, it is almost always wisest to respect the editing policies that bind all editors and call for input from an uninvolved administrator, rather than to invite controversy by acting unilaterally.". You were editing content on that page since December 13th, which makes you an editor of that page and not acting as an admin. Once you edit a page as an editor, making editorial decisions on what content is added, then you are involved and shouldn't be using your admin toolset. If I'm reading the situation wrong I'd be happy to be corrected. Valeince (talk) 21:52, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- I semiprotected because of BLP violations from multiple IPs due to media attention. There's no preservation of (my) POV or edits happening. tedder (talk) 22:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- I didn't think about the BLP angle of the protection which could be argued that it would make one exempt from the involve clause noted above. Thanks for taking the time to discuss.Valeince (talk) 22:07, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for your understanding. There's a lot of fuzziness that goes into it, for a generally "neglected" article I'm more likely to take on both roles, when it's extreme (BLP versus simple vandalism), and when I'm not taking a side in an edit conflict I'm more likely (subjectively, I was reverting my own "side" that the IPs had added). tedder (talk) 00:50, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
- I didn't think about the BLP angle of the protection which could be argued that it would make one exempt from the involve clause noted above. Thanks for taking the time to discuss.Valeince (talk) 22:07, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- I semiprotected because of BLP violations from multiple IPs due to media attention. There's no preservation of (my) POV or edits happening. tedder (talk) 22:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- I looked at WP:PREFER and saw this last paragraph: "Administrators who have made substantive content changes to an article are considered involved and must not use their advanced permissions to further their own positions. When involved in a dispute, it is almost always wisest to respect the editing policies that bind all editors and call for input from an uninvolved administrator, rather than to invite controversy by acting unilaterally.". You were editing content on that page since December 13th, which makes you an editor of that page and not acting as an admin. Once you edit a page as an editor, making editorial decisions on what content is added, then you are involved and shouldn't be using your admin toolset. If I'm reading the situation wrong I'd be happy to be corrected. Valeince (talk) 21:52, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
thank you for helping me make edits. Please email me more information at any time. The topic of the article is Evil Lebaron - You're the best!
CC747 (talk) 00:06, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
- @CC747: Make sure to turn off that 'minor' tag, and note you can't use yourself as a source. tedder (talk) 00:09, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
_by_Ron.jpg)
Thank you for the help. I'm making notes for myself to upload statements made by actual LeBaron family members. On my way to study uploading documents to reference by wiki. Thank you! Send me guidance. Please advise.
News On Wiki check-in
Hi there! Thank you for your interest in our campaign to improve the public's knowledge about local newspapers. Time has flown since we got going in September, and our six month campaign ends in just a month! We'd like to check in with you about work you have done, or any articles you'd like to write or edit to do before we wrap up.
We published a mid-campaign report, highlighting strong work from several Wikipedia editors (both new wiki folks and veterans); contributions from Kristy Roschke's journalism course at Arizona State University; and strong engagement from groups like AfroCROWD and Wikimedians of the Caribbean.
As we begin our final push, we would love to learn what you have been working on, or help you with any challenges. We're hosting several informal video conference sessions in the next week. (If that format is no good for you, just let us know.) We'd love to hear what newspapers have caught your interest, any articles you've already written, and also any kind of support you could use in writing up newspapers that lack Wikipedia entries. We'll focus especially on newspapers of the Caribbean in our final month, as we continue to work on Black-owned U.S. newspapers, and newspapers of Washington State.
Please register for one of these Zoom meetings. If these times don't work for you, or if you hate Zoom, etc., just reply here (please include the text "[[User:Peteforsyth]] and [[User:Shanluan]]" so we get notifications), and we'll find another way to connect with you.
- Saturday Jan. 30, 2pm Pacific / 5 PM Eastern (with Pete)
- Tuesday Feb. 2, 5pm Pacific / 8pm Eastern (with Pete)
- Wednesday Feb. 3, 12:30pm Pacific / 3:30 PM Eastern (with Sherry)
- Thursday Feb. 4, 12:30pm Pacific / 3:30 PM Eastern (with Sherry)
We hope to hear from you soon! -Pete Forsyth (talk) 00:50, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Writing Black History of the Pacific Northwest into Wikipedia - Editathon 2021
 |
|
Cascadia Wikimedians placed this banner at 03:46, 24 February 2021 (UTC) by using the Wikipedia:Meetup/Portland/Participants list.To subscribe to or unsubscribe from messages from Wikipedia:Meetup/Portland, please add or remove your name here.
Noah Oppenheim Review
Thanks for taking the time to do a review of the Request Edits at Talk:Noah_Oppenheim#Request Edits March 2021. I answered your questions at the bottom of the request. Thanks again for your time. Ed. BC1278 (talk) 21:55, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Some baklava for you!
|
Tedder,
Thanks to all of you who make Wikipedia so special. I made edits to the article about Robert Kadlec which cited US Congressional testimony and US Federal budget documents. I am NOT Robert Kadlec nor related to him in any way what so ever. But I did notice, like you, that his page has been riddled with inputs that are not wth in the wikimedia rules. Noting that in fact I have no connection to the subject, how would you suggest the article properly note his role? LibrorumCere (talk) 12:42, 20 May 2021 (UTC) |
- @LibrorumCere:, your edits appeared suspicious to others, and it appeared you might have a business or employment relationship. In any case, use Talk:Robert Kadlec to discuss your edits and things you find objectionable. tedder (talk) 15:36, 20 May 2021 (UTC)