User talk:Wugapodes/Archive 22

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Wugapodes in topic Revolving IP ban
Archive 15Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25

Participation in a signpost interview for WikiProject Redirect

Hi Wugapodes, hope that you're well. I was wondering if you'd be able to participate in a Signpost interview in your capacity as a contributor to WikiProject Redirect? I am enthusiastic about these interviews because they help remind other Wikipedians about the passionate and diverse group of volunteers that edit Wikipedia, and into the many discussions and editors that inhabit our space, nooks and crannies. If you had time to even answer a few questions here (User:Tom (LT)/sandbox/WikiProject redirects interview draft) I'd be very grateful :). Tom (LT) (talk) 04:44, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

15:32, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Message regarding Capricorn from Zetana

Hi Wugapodes, could you add Template:R to product name to Capricorn under the category "Related information, To"? I created Dashlane, Inc. to redirect to Dashlane but I didn't see that category when Capricorn opened. Thanks for creating the tool, I've found it very helpful. Zetana (talk) 06:02, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

@Zetana: Thanks for letting me know,   Done Wug·a·po·des 19:19, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! Zetana (talk) 00:14, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Article of potential interest

Hi Wugapodes! Given your interest in postmodern literature, I thought you might be interested in this article I recently came across if you haven't seen it before: The Iraq War: A Historiography of Wikipedia Changelogs. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 21:38, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

@Sdkb: Coming soon, my 1078-volume magnum opus on the nature of human suffering: Pit of vipers: all 1,211,822 revisions to the Administrators' Noticeboard, Incidents, compiled chronologically, typeset, printed, and bound by hand on acid-washed paper unsuitable for library archival alongside, at your option, a copy of the GNU Free Documentation License printed from my laptop onto computer paper.
In all seriousness though, it does look like a very interesting work particularly as a commentary on what constitutes the historical record. Never knew I could turn my time browsing old page histories into art though... Wug·a·po·des 22:54, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

New Page Patrol newsletter September 2021

 
 
New Page Review queue September 2021

Hello Wugapodes,

Please join this discussion - there is increase in the abuse of Wikipedia and its processes by POV pushers, Paid Editors, and by holders of various user rights including Autopatrolled. Even our review systems themselves at AfC and NPR have been infiltrated. The good news is that detection is improving, but the downside is that it creates the need for a huge clean up - which of course adds to backlogs.

Copyright violations are also a serious issue. Most non-regular contributors do not understand why, and most of our Reviewers are not experts on copyright law - and can't be expected to be, but there is excellent, easy-to-follow advice on COPYVIO detection here.

At the time of the last newsletter (#25, December 2020) the backlog was only just over 2,000 articles. New Page Review is an official system. It's the only firewall against the inclusion of new, improper pages.

There are currently 706 New Page Reviewers plus a further 1,080 admins, but as much as nearly 90% of the patrolling is still being done by around only the 20 or so most regular patrollers.

If you are no longer very active on Wikipedia or you no longer wish to be part of the New Page Reviewer user group, please consider asking any admin to remove you from the list. This will enable NPP to have a better overview of its performance and what improvements need to be made to the process or its software.

 

Various awards are due to be allocated by the end of the year and barnstars are overdue. If you would like to manage this, please let us know. Indeed, if you are interested in coordinating NPR, it does not involve much time and the tasks are described here.


To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. Sent to 827 users. 04:33, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

18:30, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

GAN Report oddity

Wugapodes, in the section on the Reports page listing nominations by editor, there's one oddity that isn't being formatted correctly. One of the editor's names appears to be in some sort of Arabic script, which runs right to left rather than the usual left to write, and because of this the number of articles, which should be a "(4)" after the username, appears partially before and partially after the name, with one of the parens reversed.

I'm not at all sure whether it's worth your time to figure out how to get the number back so it's to the right of the name, but I thought you'd want to know about it, if only for the bemusement factor. Hope all is well! The Reports page continues to be quite useful. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:32, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: What an interesting result! When I looked I didn't see the formatting you described. It might be a difference in how your web browser handles right-to-left text, but on Firefox I see "(4)" preceding the Arabic username. I'm happily surprised that the bot handled RTL text so gracefully. The format can be fit into the others by adding a left-to-right mark following the username, but I think I'd rather leave the output as is. This would require adding an additional character to every entry where it won't make a difference in most cases, though I might be able to be smarter about it if I added some check for RTL languages. I'm not sure how to do that, but if I find a simple test for RTL scripts, I can implement the LTR mark for those specificially.
I'm doing well, and hope the same for you! I've been at work on MediaWiki mostly, working on getting Extension:ChessBrowser up to production standards. TheDJ has been helping a lot recently, and I've been trying to document the VisualEditor integration process so that it is easier for developers to add VisualEditor support into more of our tools. Lots of work, but I've learned a lot about WikiMedia's infrastructure to support technical development. I think it will come in handy in the near future as we rework the process and the DYK bots. Wug·a·po·des 21:22, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
I'm doing well here. My browser is Safari (still at 13.1.2; I need to upgrade at some point), so that may be the reason behind the different display. The MediaWiki work sounds interesting; glad you're enjoying it and learning a lot. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:48, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2021

22:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Question from Abarrahman (21:56, 27 September 2021)

write an article --Abarrahman (talk) 21:56, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Abarrahman, are you asking how to write an article? You can find instructions at the help page on writing your first article. Let me know if you have other questions! Wug·a·po·des 22:29, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Question from Abarrahman on User:Abarrahman (23:57, 27 September 2021)

How long will it take to publish my page ? --Abarrahman (talk) 23:57, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Revolving IP ban

Hi, you previously helped out with a revolving IP block that continues to vandalize certain pages. The latest block (3 months) literally just expired and they are immediately at it again. Hope you can help out again.

Special:Contributions/2603:9000:9907:1100:0:0:0:0/64

--HankScorpio1519 (talk) 22:28, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

@HankScorpio1519: Blocked for a year, let me know if you see it happening from any other IPs. Wug·a·po·des 23:54, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Will do, thank you! HankScorpio1519 (talk) 02:07, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Question from Abarrahman on User:Abarrahman (10:10, 29 September 2021)

Can I publish this on Wikipedia ? --Abarrahman (talk) 10:10, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  Arbitration

  • A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
  • Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
  • The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

  Miscellaneous

  • Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
  • The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.

16:29, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Wugapodes for ARBCOM!

[18] Seriously, I'd love to see you on the committee, please run. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:56, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Time and well-being permitting, of course! Vanamonde (Talk) 21:56, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
@Vanamonde93: I appreciate the vote of confidence, and for what it's worth the confidence of others is the main thing driving my consideration. I spent a while trying to draft a reply, but the common theme is that I'm not really interested in being on ArbCom. On the list of wiki-chores I want to do over the next year, ArbCom wouldn't be my first choice, but if I'm needed, I'll do it. Wish I could say there was some big mental struggle between pros and cons, but having talked to ArbCom members and read the job description, it's hard to muster up a reaction other than ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Wug·a·po·des 00:48, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

Continuing conduct from Marek

Right after User:Volunteer Marek rejected your warning, Marek posted at a deletion discussion accusing another user (User:Niki 24) of behaving like a banned user.--Erin Vaxx (talk) 05:45, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

What??? I don’t even know who User:Niki 24 is!!! What in the world are you talking about? This is an absurd accusation which is pulled from some alternative reality. This is really too much, and sorry, Wugapodes, you are partly to blame for this for encouraging and enabling this kind of behavior. Volunteer Marek 05:54, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
@Erin Vaxx: I suggest you find something else to do before you wind up blocked. Wug·a·po·des 05:59, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Re: WP:AN#E-960 TBAN — Request for the lifting of sanctions

Thanks for shutting whatever was going on there down.

Cheers. François Robere (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Buses on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 22:30, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

RfA 2021 review update

Thanks so much for participating in Phase 1 of the RfA 2021 review. 8 out of the 21 issues discussed were found to have consensus. Thanks to our closers of Phase 1, Primefac and Wugapodes.

The following had consensus support of participating editors:

  1. Corrosive RfA atmosphere
    The atmosphere at RfA is deeply unpleasant. This makes it so fewer candidates wish to run and also means that some members of our community don't comment/vote.
  2. Level of scrutiny
    Many editors believe it would be unpleasant to have so much attention focused on them. This includes being indirectly a part of watchlists and editors going through your edit history with the chance that some event, possibly a relatively trivial event, becomes the focus of editor discussion for up to a week.
  3. Standards needed to pass keep rising
    It used to be far easier to pass RfA however the standards necessary to pass have continued to rise such that only "perfect" candidates will pass now.
  4. Too few candidates
    There are too few candidates. This not only limits the number of new admin we get but also makes it harder to identify other RfA issues because we have such a small sample size.
  5. "No need for the tools" is a poor reason as we can find work for new admins

The following issues had a rough consensus of support from editors:

  1. Lifetime tenure (high stakes atmosphere)
    Because RfA carries with it lifetime tenure, granting any given editor sysop feels incredibly important. This creates a risk adverse and high stakes atmosphere.
  2. Admin permissions and unbundling
    There is a large gap between the permissions an editor can obtain and the admin toolset. This brings increased scrutiny for RFA candidates, as editors evaluate their feasibility in lots of areas.
  3. RfA should not be the only road to adminship
    Right now, RfA is the only way we can get new admins, but it doesn't have to be.

Please consider joining the brainstorming which will last for the next 1-2 weeks. This will be followed by Phase 2, a 30 day discussion to consider solutions to the problems identified in Phase 1.


There are 2 future mailings planned. One when Phase 2 opens and one with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Best, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for closing Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2021 review/Issues. That was a LOT of feedback to read, digest and summarize. Liz Read! Talk! 00:29, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
My thanks to yourself and Primefac as well. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 10:39, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Music on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:31, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

15:29, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Antarctican2606 (00:18, 12 October 2021)

Hi, So I was looking at the article about Rachmaninoff's 3rd piano concerto and I found a really good analysis of it online: https://ttu-ir.tdl.org/bitstream/handle/2346/8487/31295001139194.pdf?sequence=1

What do I do in order to get that analysis onto the article? Do I have to paraphrase it fully or can I copy some? --Antarctican2606 (talk) 00:18, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Antarctican2606 thanks for the question! You may not copy any of the text. You should summarize the points the author makes in your own words and provide an inline citation. Be careful of close paraphrasing as it may be considered plagiarism, but if you summarize the points in your own words it should. We have advice on how to summarize sources appropriately. You may also find our advice on adding citations helpful. Let me know if you have other questions! Wug·a·po·des 00:39, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:30, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

20:52, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Capricorn

Could make the edit automatically submit (around here)? ― Qwerfjkltalk 11:58, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Question from Vincent O Neill Castlehaven (19:32, 23 October 2021)

Where can I vote --Vincent O Neill Castlehaven (talk) 19:32, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi Vincent O Neill Castlehaven, in what election are you trying to vote? Wug·a·po·des 20:47, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 backlog drive

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
 
  • On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin.
  • Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled.
  • Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive.
  • Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive.
  • Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 01:59, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

20:07, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Growth Newsletter #19

18:36, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

RfA Reform 2021 Phase 2 has begun

Following a 2 week brainstorming period and a 1 week proposal period, the 30 day discussion of changes to our Request for Adminship process has begun. Following feedback on Phase 1, in order to ensure that the largest number of people possible can see all proposals, new proposals will only be accepted for the for the first 7 days of Phase 2. The 30 day discussion is scheduled to last until November 30. Please join the discussion or even submit your own proposal.

There is 1 future mailing planned with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

16:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

  Guideline and policy news

  • Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

  Technical news

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous


20:27, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Notification of template substitution

  Greetings, Wugapodes. You are receiving this notification because you've agreed to consider endorsing prospective admin candidates identified by the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title:
  • Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow.
  • To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

TolBot | Talk | Owner 03:54, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello Wugapodes. I just wanted to thank you for opting-in to receive these notifications. This is the first bot-notification of the trial now in progress. In this case, the notification is a bit late as the goal is to have them posted within 24 hours of the original message. I anticipate that things will improve over time. I'd like to reiterate that you are under no obligation to endorse this or any posted message although you are certainly welcome if you are so inclined. In considering an endorsement, you have fulfilled what was asked of you opting-in. I won't be messaging you in the future when this notification posts, and don't mean to encroach on you now. I am messaging you this time for two reasons; first: because this is the beginning of the trial and I did want to send you my thanks. And, second: because I wanted to tell you about another editor I messaged (without using the template) but you may know this former admin whose tools were removed for inactivity (not under a cloud) and again, you are certainly welcome to consider endorsing that message as well. It is on the talk page of user:Toddst1[27]. I wish you the best and thank you again.--John Cline (talk) 06:19, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

WikiCup 2021 November newsletter

The WikiCup is over for another year and the finalists can relax! Our Champion this year is   The Rambling Man (submissions), who amassed over 5000 points in the final round, achieving 8 featured articles and almost 500 reviews. It was a very competitive round; seven of the finalists achieved over 1000 points in the round (enough to win the 2019 contest), and three scored over 3000 (enough to win the 2020 event). Our 2021 finalists and their scores were:

  1.   The Rambling Man (submissions) with 5072 points
  2.   Lee Vilenski (submissions) with 3276 points
  3.   Amakuru (submissions) with 3197 points
  4.   Epicgenius (submissions) with 1611 points
  5.   Gog the Mild (submissions) with 1571 points
  6.   BennyOnTheLoose (submissions) with 1420 points
  7.   Hog Farm (submissions) with 1043 points
  8.   Bloom6132 (submissions) with 528 points

All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.

Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition, not forgetting User:Jarry1250, who runs the scoring bot.

If you have views on whether the rules or scoring need adjustment for next year's contest, please comment on the WikiCup talk page. Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2022 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Revolving IP ban

Hi, you helped me out with a revolving IP ban on 9/28/2021 (Special:Contributions/2603:9000:9907:1100:0:0:0:0/64). Same pattern from this user now: Special:Contributions/96.58.171.137

Hope you can help again. HankScorpio1519 (talk) 16:52, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

@HankScorpio1519: I blocked the range 96.58.171.0/34 for two weeks. Thanks for letting me know and be in touch if you see other problems. Wug·a·po·des 22:39, 4 November 2021 (UTC)