User talk:Clpo13/Archive 19

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 25

Signpost issue 4 – 29 March 2018

New Page Review Newsletter No.10

Hello Clpo13, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

  • ACTRIAL's six month experiment restricting new page creation to (auto)confirmed users ended on 14 March. As expected, a greatly increased number of unsuitable articles and candidates for deletion are showing up in the feed again, and the backlog has since increased already by ~30%. Please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day.

Paid editing

  • Now that ACTRIAL is inoperative pending discussion, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

Nominate competent users for Autopatrolled

  • While patrolling articles, if you find an editor that is particularly competent at creating quality new articles, and that user has created more than 25 articles (rather than stubs), consider nominating them for the 'Autopatrolled' user right HERE.

News

  • The next issue Wikipedia's newspaper The Signpost has now been published after a long delay. There are some articles in it, including ACTRIAL wrap-up that will be of special interest to New Page Reviewers. Don't hesitate to contribute to the comments sections. The Signpost is one of the best ways to stay up date with news and new developments - please consider subscribing to it. All editors of Wikipedia and associated projects are welcome to submit articles on any topic for consideration by the The Signpost's editorial team for the next issue.

To opt-out of future mailings, go here. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Matthew Island and Hunter Island. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).

Administrator changes

added 331dotCordless LarryClueBot NG
removed Gogo DodoPb30SebastiankesselSeicerSoLando

Guideline and policy news

  • Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
  • Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
  • The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
  • The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.

Miscellaneous

  • A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
  • The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

19:28, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

18:08, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Bitcoin Cash. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

15:20, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

18:16, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 April 2018

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Template talk:Infobox writer. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

16:18, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed ChochopkCoffeeGryffindorJimpKnowledge SeekerLankiveilPeridonRjd0060

Guideline and policy news

  • The ability to create articles directly in mainspace is now indefinitely restricted to autoconfirmed users.
  • A proposal is being discussed which would create a new "event coordinator" right that would allow users to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit.

Technical news

  • AbuseFilter has received numerous improvements, including an OOUI overhaul, syntax highlighting, ability to search existing filters, and a few new functions. In particular, the search feature can be used to ensure there aren't existing filters for what you need, and the new equals_to_any function can be used when checking multiple namespaces. One major upcoming change is the ability to see which filters are the slowest. This information is currently only available to those with access to Logstash.
  • When blocking anonymous users, a cookie will be applied that reloads the block if the user changes their IP. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. This currently only occurs when hard-blocking accounts.
  • The block notice shown on mobile will soon be more informative and point users to a help page on how to request an unblock, just as it currently does on desktop.
  • There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • Lankiveil (Craig Franklin) passed away in mid-April. Lankiveil joined Wikipedia on 12 August 2004 and became an administrator on 31 August 2008. During his time with the Wikimedia community, Lankiveil served as an oversighter for the English Wikipedia and as president of Wikimedia Australia.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Taiwan

Could you semi the article too? IP already back with IP hopping and block evasion. Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done Hopefully that will help for a time. clpo13(talk) 08:35, 2 May 2018 (UTC)


All of the information in the Taiwan is completely backed up with reliable reference sources, why do you continue to allow this Taiwan page to be negatively edited in by communist Chinese trolls who want to paint a negative image of Taiwan instead of listing Taiwan's achievements in technology just like the South Korea page? Again all the information pertaining to Taiwan's achievements are 100% true and completely backed up with reliable reference sources. Please reconsider your semi-block?? Thank you! 27.81.5.60 (talk) 08:38, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

It's not just a matter of having appropriate references. It's also important to consider whether content is appropriate for a neutral encyclopedia (see WP:NPOV). Unnecessarily promotional material can and will be removed from articles.
At any rate, you should be discussing your concerns about the article at its talk page instead of constantly reverting to your preferred version. That is called edit warring and it's a blockable offense. Jumping to different IP addresses to continue edit warring is why the article is currently protected from editing by anonymous users. I'm sure there's a balance to be found between overemphasizing certain achievements and omitting them entirely, but that can only be determined through talk page discussion. clpo13(talk) 08:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure how much talking to them is going to help :) From the ANI thread they appear to be doing this for some time, constantly IP hopping and block evading Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:56, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
Worth a shot, eh? Can't say I didn't give them fair warning. clpo13(talk) 09:09, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Shaw Communications / 24.87.196.38

As Shaw Communications appears to be an ISP, how does that IP warrant a shared template? I'm guessing most IP addresses are registered to an ISP, but that doesn't make them shared. ―Mandruss  16:08, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

I usually just slap {{Shared IP}} on dynamic IPs, but I guess {{ISP}} (or {{Dynamic IP}}) would be a better template. clpo13(talk) 16:11, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
How can one tell whether it's dynamic? ―Mandruss  16:13, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
At the bottom of the user or user talk page of IP editors, there are a few links to get info about the IP address. The link that says Geolocate points to a page like this that says whether the address is dynamically or statically assigned. Since a dynamic IP could represent many different users of an ISP, it can be helpful to put a template on the talk page so that users can be made aware that messages might not be relevant to them. clpo13(talk) 16:20, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 07:12, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Done, thanks for the heads up. clpo13(talk) 15:46, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Jacques Goulet

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Jacques Goulet. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Could you please be more careful?

You declined my request for semi-protection, characterizing my concern as a "content dispute".

Excuse me? If this was a genuine good faith content dispute my wikistalker would not resort to masking their ID by using an anonymous IP address.

The edit summary you left recommended I "consider dispute resolution."

Excuse me? Do you really not understand how editing using an anonymous IP address works? The sockpuppets who have been wikihounding me choose to use anonymous IP addresses for two reasons. They either use them to escape being held accountable for indefensible edits -- making any attempt at dispute resolution a complete waste of time; or they have to use anonymous IP addresses because they have been indefinitely blocked for persistent vandalism. Trying to engage in dispute resolution with someone who has proven they hate me, who has proven they have a hopeless irredeemable bad attitude? Also a complete waste of time.

I don't know you. I don't remember us ever interacting before. I am willing to accept that your decision does not represent your best work, and that the rest of your contributions are reasonable, show good quality decision making. But, if the effort you put into giving my request reasonable fair consideration is typical of the effort you put into being an administrator? Honestly, I would encourage you to consider resigning your mop. Geo Swan (talk) 02:30, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

@Geo Swan: I apologize if I gave the impression that I dismissed your concerns too quickly, but from an outside perspective, your claims of hounding and sockpuppetry weren't immediately clear. The situation looked like a simple editing dispute that didn't require page protection. Anonymous editors frequently do participate in dispute resolution, which is why I mentioned it. If you have evidence of bad behavior by other users, I would recommend you request action at WP:ANI, which is better suited for situations like this than WP:RFPP. clpo13(talk) 16:27, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

16:28, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Afd decision for List of North American supercentenarians

I strongly disagree with your decision. The redirect is misleading and inaccurate, as is the Asian one. Would you object to my creating Lists of North American supercentenarians, a list of lists, and redirecting there? If not, I'll also do some research and try to figure out a fix for the Asian/Japanese case as well. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:35, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

@Clarityfiend: I agree that both redirects are less than ideal. I have no objection to retargeting it to a better article. clpo13(talk) 15:18, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
Done. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:02, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

22:23, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Joy-Ann Reid

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Joy-Ann Reid. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

17:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Ocean Nuclear

My AIV report is being ignored and archived w/o action, with respect to this user [46], so many violations of policies can we do something? --Quek157 (talk) 19:42, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

and to add, they created at mainspace first, then G11, then moved over to draft space --Quek157 (talk) 19:45, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
@Quek157: as Maile said on AIV, this user has made some good contributions, and I'm sure they've got the hint by now about COI. At this time, I don't think any action is necessary. The promotional draft has been deleted and they haven't edited since. If they recreate it again or start editing promotionally in other ways, you should definitely bring their behavior up at WP:ANI. clpo13(talk) 23:12, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
concurred. Quek157 (talk) 23:17, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 May 2018

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

Hello Clpo13, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

  • WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags

  • Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:

  • A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons

  • There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy

  • Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

  • The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
  • Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English

  • A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.

News

  • Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
  • The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Peter Thiel

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Peter Thiel. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

12:40, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

You're biased

This is baloney. Not only is Dr Fleischman edit-warring in violation of multiple reliable sources AND talk page consensus, I wasn't even given a chance to respond.

Also, would you mind having a look at at this in-no-way-suspicious conversation? 222.233.53.136 (talk) 03:15, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Aw shucks that's terrible. Hey Clpo13, thank you for looking at that matter again. I appreciate it. Drmies (talk) 16:08, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Despite the school block in place, it appears vandalism is continuing from this IP address.--Cahk (talk) 07:30, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Looks like Dlohcierekim got there first and disabled talk page access. clpo13(talk) 15:28, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Faik Konica

Hi Clpo13. Osourdounmou moved Faik Konica. If Osourdounmou wants to move the page, they should open a move request. You have warned them for massive disruption related to page moves [61]. I can not move the page back to its previous name as it says "The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Please choose another name, or use Requested moves to ask an administrator to help you with the move". Can you move it back to the previous name? Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:02, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

@Ktrimi991: I've moved the page back to its old title with a note that future moves should be discussed as potentially controversial per WP:RM#CM. clpo13(talk) 15:32, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks a lot Clpo13. Much appreciated. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 19:03, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

White Helmets RfC

Thank you for your input. I thought I would alert you that in the past 24 hours MVBW has deleted one of my comments[1] and Alsee has attempted to rewrite my proposal [2] without warning. Please continue to monitor this page. GPRamirez5 (talk) 03:43, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

References

Administrators' newsletter – June 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2018).

Administrator changes

added None
removed Al Ameer sonAliveFreeHappyCenariumLupoMichaelBillington

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in June. This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team will build granular types of blocks in 2018 (e.g. a block from uploading or editing specific pages, categories, or namespaces, as opposed to a full-site block). Feedback on the concept may be left at the talk page.
  • There is now a checkbox on Special:ListUsers to let you see only users in temporary user groups.
  • It is now easier for blocked mobile users to see why they were blocked.

Arbitration

  • A recent technical issue with the Arbitration Committee's spam filter inadvertently caused all messages sent to the committee through Wikipedia (i.e. Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee) to be discarded. If you attempted to send an email to the Arbitration Committee via Wikipedia between May 16 and May 31, your message was not received and you are encouraged to resend it. Messages sent outside of these dates or directly to the Arbitration Committee email address were not affected by this issue.

Miscellaneous


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

21:54, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:White Helmets (Syrian Civil War). Legobot (talk) 04:24, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Actually that was my first time as i was redirected there by a third party accessing my google account n my data system as what i can see from my device as im in canada but my device shows usa as all my policies are alternated n all my trusted certifates shows third party accessing them ..as what i know there is another person joined in my account .. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.87.104.49 (talk) 04:40, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

June 2018 GOCE newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors June 2018 News

Welcome to the June 2018 GOCE newsletter, in which you will find Guild updates since the February edition. Progress continues to be made on the copyediting backlog, which has been reduced to 7 months and reached a new all-time low. Requests continue to be handled efficiently this year, with 272 completed by the end of May (an average completion time of 10.5 days). Fewer than 10% of these waited longer than 20 days, and the longest wait time was 29 days.

Wikipedia in general, and the Guild in particular, experienced a deep loss with the death on 20 March of Corinne. Corinne (a GOCE coordinator since 1 July 2016) was a tireless aide on the requests page, and her peerless copyediting is a part of innumerable GAs and FAs. Her good cheer, courtesy and tact are very much missed.

March drive: The goal was to remove June, July and August 2017 from our backlog and all February 2018 Requests (a total of 219 articles). This drive was an outstanding success, and by the end of the month all but eight of these articles were cleared. Of the 33 editors who signed up, 19 recorded 277 copy edits (425,758 words).

April blitz: This one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 15 through 21 April, focusing on Requests and the last eight articles tagged in August 2017. At the end of the week there were only 17 pending requests, with none older than 17 days. Of the nine editors who signed up, eight editors completed 22 copy edits (62,412 words).

May drive: We set out to remove September, October and November 2017 from our backlog and all April 2018 Requests (a total of 298 articles). There was great success this month with the backlog more than halved from 1,449 articles at the beginning of the month to a record low of 716 articles. Officially, of the 20 who signed up, 15 editors recorded 151 copy edits (248,813 words).

Coordinator elections: It's election time again. Nominations for Guild coordinators (who will serve a six-month term for the second half of 2018) have begun, and will close at 23:59 UTC on 15 June. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible, and self-nominations are encouraged. Voting will take place between 00:01 UTC on 16 June and 23:59 UTC on 30 June.

June blitz: Stay tuned for this one-week copy-editing blitz, which will take place in mid-June.

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Corinne, Jonesey95, Miniapolis, Reidgreg and Tdslk.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:26, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

White Helmets

Hello Clpo13. Thanks for keeping tabs of the White Helmets article and for all your endeavour to mediate in what is truly a divisive matter. You've protected the page from vandalism and you tagged it to explain the situation. Hours later, an editor removed your tag as well as the neutrality marker placed there by an editor who hasn't touched the article since the time our conflict began[69]. As you see from the link, Volunteer Marek claims that this is an IDONTLIKEIT issue - as though there is no dispute when you know full well there is an RfC to which Marek has heavily participated. Obviously I reverted. All I wish to know is, are editors (especially those party to an RfC) permitted to remove tags as such? And did I do something wrong in replacing them? If Marek is right to remove them then I will self-revert but what he is not right about is the reasoning. The IDONTLIKEIT label is being thrust upon us to disagree with the current text but in reality, IDONTLIKEIT is a non sequitur here. Our side is pushing for parity whilst the other is pushing to tilt the balance so as to justify one word. I'm not using this space to criticise them as we have the talk page to discuss differences, I am just saying that the summary reason in Marek's removal is a false representation of the editor to add the neutrality tag and the rest of us. --Coldtrack (talk) 21:08, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Honestly, I'd leave the POV tag up since the discussion is clearly not settled, though it didn't really need to be (re-?)added yesterday either. There's already a discussion going on and the presence (or lack) of the tag isn't going to substantially affect that. The removal of the protection lock was probably accidental and it's not a big deal. Anonymous editors will still get a warning when they try to edit. clpo13(talk) 21:57, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
OK I take the points. Thanks. --Coldtrack (talk) 22:06, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

The delete discussion ended with a consensus that the image be moved to Commons. Why hasn't it yet happened? --Kailash29792 (talk) 12:38, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

@Kailash29792: it must have been an oversight by the discussion closer. I see that file's already been moved, so I'll take care of the others. clpo13(talk) 16:26, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

21:55, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Anonymous post used

Hi,

Could you please help me out with something?

On the Talk page of this article (post on talk pagehttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Origin_of_the_Romanians&diff=845077995&oldid=845041006) someone (has posted a reprobable message using unacceptable language). What I find outrageous is that two other editors have gone and accused me of this.

Since I am relatively new, I do fear this - since at least one of the editors has tried in the past to shut me down on technical grounds (account behind a proxy - which I explained why that is and moreover, when the problem was pointed to me I immediately created my account and signed all my posts.). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cealicuca (talkcontribs) 10:22, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Strange, since I have not accused anyone besides the IP for being a strawman sock. See [75]. So, only one editor has accused Cealicuca of being that IP. Tgeorgescu (talk) 12:05, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Quite strange indeed. You entire post is here. Quoting you, "Creating a separate account to argue one side [...]" implies that the person you were referring already has an account and created a new one (separate). Corroborated with the fact that your post was made on 05:59, 9 June 2018 (UTC), and that at 06:27, 9 June 2018 (UTC) you posted on my Talk page a quite lengthy "reminder" of Wiki Policies (a thing you never did, not even when we had quite heated arguments/debates), to which I replied at 10:04, 9 June 2018 (UTC) It feels quite natural that I argue you were actually accusing me. Either that or you were actually accusing Borsoka (who, incidentally, was one of the people "praised" by the inappropriate post, you being the only one who was mentioned in an unacceptable way) but somehow decided to "remind" me of the Wiki policies. So which is it? Cealicuca (talk) 18:31, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
See formal fallacy. I have decided to inform you of WP:RULES regardless of whether it was you who was socking. Tgeorgescu (talk) 18:34, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
@Tgeorgescu: On the contrary, I believe you should see formal fallacy. As I said, having a "separate account" implies that there was another account (let's call it "main"), regardless of the timing oddity of you reminding me of the Wiki policies. Again, which is it? Which of the editors was implied to have created a separate account in order for them to post a provocative and vulgar message under the cover of anonymity?Cealicuca (talk) 19:20, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
I did not profess to know who it was. Tgeorgescu (talk) 19:34, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
@Cealicuca, Tgeorgescu, and Borsoka: the message I removed certainly felt a lot like someone who is already involved in the talk page (or solicited there by someone), but without evidence, it's inappropriate to insinuate that it was anyone specific. That said, Cealicuca, a brief rundown of Wikipedia's guidelines and policies is certainly not amiss for a relatively new (and frankly, single-purpose) editor in such a heated topic area.
As far as where to go from here, I can only second Swarm's suggestion to look into dispute resolution, such as an RFC, for further discussion. There doesn't appear to be much progress among the current participants on the talk page. clpo13(talk) 20:01, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

@Clpo13: Precisely. @Tgeorgescu has shown in the past he does not cower from launching an investigation - so I find both the explicit accusation and the insinuation (even more so) extremely bothersome. If they have something they want to say - why not ask for an investigation? As for him reminding me of the WP:RULES - sure, he can do that. But doing that immediately after the insinuation, on my talk page, without mentioning an explicit reason for it leaves no room for interpretation. Sorry to have bothered you and thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cealicuca (talkcontribs) 20:30, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, my message implied their association. However, I must admit, it can only be a coincidence that neither of them can use the "ping" template and sign their posts and both of them make comments mainly on the Talk page of the Origin of the Romanians. Borsoka (talk) 00:34, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Vitamin B3

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Vitamin B3. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Help with image

Hi and thank you for your help with this image: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Press_photo_2_Brothers_on_the_4th_floor_A-700x998.jpg#Summary

I guess I'm all confused about this. One of the artists gave me permission to use it. I know that normally the photographer would legally hold the copyright, but this was a work for hire, and as an employee, the artist would, I think, have the ability to give permission. Failing that, I can see if the producers (who founded the group) want to go to all the trouble of donating. Please let me know. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Albanymike (talkcontribs) 22:10, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

@Albanymike: I'm happy to help as much as I'm able. Copyright is a very tricky business to get right. The page WP:DONATEIMAGE has information on the right email address to send permission to (permissions-en@wikimedia.org) and how to format the email properly. I'm pretty sure that the rightsholder has to send the email, but forwarded permissions might be acceptable (don't quote me on that). If this was a work for hire, then whoever hired the photographer does own the copyright, but that may have to be proven as well to avoid any question of doubt. Once permission to use the image under an appropriate free license is received and processed by the volunteers monitoring that email address, a special tag will be placed on the image to show there is permission for it to be used. This could take a very long time, however, given the backlog that queue experiences. The image may be deleted in the meantime, but if so, it'll be restored once the permission is processed. clpo13(talk) 22:36, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Clpo13, Albanymike I gather from a different photo permissions issue I was involved in recently that forwarded emails of permissions used to be acceptable, but are now generally rejected by OTRS as being too easy to forge. Our help pages are out of date on this, it seems. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 12:58, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello Clpo13, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!

  • As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
  • Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: Special Edition New Page Patroller's Barnstar. Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: 100 review coin, 250 review coin, 500 review coin, 1000 review certificate.
  • Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

21:47, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:31, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Brian Martin (social scientist). Legobot (talk) 04:27, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

23:10, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

HI, IT's Duchess Begum There's a spelling error and I can't change it do the page protective status. In the Sentence The Duchess's first engagement... There's no need for the s on the end All I want to do is change it. Is there a way you can? Also maybe a more recent picture should be used. Or at least add one from their wedding like there is on the Page for the Duchess of Cambridge's page.

Thank You

Duchess Begum (talk) 01:26, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

@Duchess Begum: the page is semi-protected. You'll be able to edit the page once your user account is four days old and you've made ten total edits to Wikipedia. Until that time, you can request an edit to a semi-protected page by placing the code {{Edit semi-protected}} along with your request on the article's talk page in the form of "please change X to Y". This is good for simple and uncontroversial changes. In this case, however, Wikipedia's Manual of Style recommends using 's for the possessive of singular nouns even when the word ends with the letter s (MOS:POSS), so I'm inclined to leave it as is.
As for the picture, there are some other freely-licensed pictures at commons:Category:Meghan Markle in 2018, but it doesn't look like there are any that are more recent than March 2018, and the only pictures from the wedding are of guests. You could also look for alternative pictures on Flickr, but be aware that in order to be used on Wikipedia, the pictures must have a free license (see commons:COM:L for what that means). If you do find one, you can request it to be uploaded with the appropriate license at WP:FFU, or you can upload it yourself at Wikimedia Commons via the Upload Wizard. I hope that helps. clpo13(talk) 16:30, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Please help.

Hi, I see you noticed and edited my article on Thaddeus Golas. Earlier today someone did a massive edit of my hard work and marked the article for deletion. I wonder if a new paradigm in Wikipedia ethics could encourage a heads up to the author before making such aggressive edits to take the time and courtesy of a discussion no matter how brief. Regarding the portrait of Golas - that was inserted by the artist himself and I don't know how to properly verify that. What I need is assistance and cooperation on this article not an ongoing battle with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Escape_Orbit who did the aggressive edit and others to come. Obviously I need to be hyper-meticulous to keep this article intact. Are you at all interested in assisting me? Metaphysics Man (talk) 18:34, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

@Metaphysics Man: I'm happy to offer advice, but I can't help you preserve your preferred version of Thaddeus Golas. The first thing you need to understand about Wikipedia is that no one owns an article. Once text is put on Wikipedia, other editors can change it as they please with no obligation to notify previous editors or ask their permission. That said, you should also assume that other editors are doing their best to improve an article, even if it looks to you like they're doing the opposite (see Wikipedia:Assume good faith). Escape Orbit's edits look like they were intended to bring the article more in line with Wikipedia's editorial policies and guidelines, such as WP:PROMO and WP:NPOV, though they made a mistake in nominating it for deletion using a process intended only for living people.
So, what do you do if you disagree with someone's changes to an article? First, you should calmly ask them about the matter and see if the two of you can come to an agreement about how best to word the article. Preferably, such a discussion would happen on the article's talk page so other interested editors can give their opinions and hopefully everyone involved can come to a consensus about what to do. If that doesn't work, disagreements can be solved in a number of other ways, as listed at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
As for the image, the artist would need to give evidence of permission by following the guidance at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. This is a necessity given how often copyrighted works are uploaded with false claims of free licensing by people who found them somewhere online. clpo13(talk) 23:09, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 June 2018

Thanks

Big thanks for the insights. One point though: the artist himself uploaded his portrait of Thaddeus Golas when he (Sylvain Despretz) created this article. (I didn't create this article; I'm care-taking it in cooperation with Sylvain Despretz personally). Under the portrait I wrote "permission to use here by Sylvain Despretz". I looked at "Wikipedia: Donating Copyrighted Materials" keeping in mind that this is a portrait not a photograph. Is there more to do concerning the permission notation? Metaphysics Man (talk) 02:04, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

00:46, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2018).

Administrator changes

added PbsouthwoodTheSandDoctor
readded Gogo Dodo
removed AndrevanDougEVulaKaisaLTony FoxWilyD

Bureaucrat changes

removed AndrevanEVula

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC about the deletion of drafts closed with a consensus to change the wording of WP:NMFD. Specifically, a draft that has been repeatedly resubmitted and declined at AfC without any substantial improvement may be deleted at MfD if consensus determines that it is unlikely to ever meet the requirements for mainspace and it otherwise meets one of the reasons for deletion outlined in the deletion policy.
  • A request for comment closed with a consensus that the {{promising draft}} template cannot be used to indefinitely prevent a WP:G13 speedy deletion nomination.

Technical news

  • Starting on July 9, the WMF Security team, Trust & Safety, and the broader technical community will be seeking input on an upcoming change that will restrict editing of site-wide JavaScript and CSS to a new technical administrators user group. Bureaucrats and stewards will be able to grant this right per a community-defined process. The intention is to reduce the number of accounts who can edit frontend code to those who actually need to, which in turn lessens the risk of malicious code being added that compromises the security and privacy of everyone who accesses Wikipedia. For more information, please review the FAQ.
  • Syntax highlighting has been graduated from a Beta feature on the English Wikipedia. To enable this feature, click the highlighter icon () in your editing toolbar (or under the hamburger menu in the 2017 wikitext editor). This feature can help prevent you from making mistakes when editing complex templates.
  • IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in July (previously scheduled for June). This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.

Miscellaneous

  • Currently around 20% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 17% a year ago. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless if you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Julius Evola

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Julius Evola. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

23:09, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

16:00, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

AN RfC page

Hi, I don't know if you can help, but this request for closure has been waiting more than two weeks and the Request for Comments is more than two months old. Can anything be done to resolve it? GPRamirez5 (talk) 16:38, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

@GPRamirez5: I'll have to pass on that. Closing RfC discussions is not my strong point, especially in contentious topic areas. You might be able to find a willing closer by asking at WP:AN. I don't think nearly as many people watch the request for closure page as they do the main noticeboard. clpo13(talk) 17:14, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:NewYorkTimesMangalyaanCartoon-fairuse.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:NewYorkTimesMangalyaanCartoon-fairuse.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:04, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

09:44, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:List of military occupations. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)

Hello Clpo13, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules
  • New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
  • Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
  • Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.
Editathons
  • Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.
The Signpost
  • The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

14:05, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2018

Administrators' newsletter – August 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2018).

Administrator changes

added Sro23
readded KaisaLYmblanter

Guideline and policy news

  • After a discussion at Meta, a new user group called "interface administrators" (formerly "technical administrator") has been created. Come the end of August, interface admins will be the only users able to edit site-wide JavaScript and CSS pages like MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css, or edit other user's personal JavaScript and CSS. The intention is to improve security and privacy by reducing the number of accounts which could be used to compromise the site or another user's account through malicious code. The new user group can be assigned and revoked by bureaucrats. Discussion is ongoing to establish details for implementing the group on the English Wikipedia.
  • Following a request for comment, the WP:SISTER style guideline now states that in the mainspace, interwiki links to Wikinews should only be made as per the external links guideline. This generally means that within the body of an article, you should not link to Wikinews about a particular event that is only a part of the larger topic. Wikinews links in "external links" sections can be used where helpful, but not automatically if an equivalent article from a reliable news outlet could be linked in the same manner.

Technical news


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tham Luang cave rescue

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tham Luang cave rescue. Legobot (talk) 04:26, 5 August 2018 (UTC)