User talk:Euryalus

Hello, I was wondering is I could/should restart doing RCP, as you are an admin who understands my situation I am looking for your input. Thanks! Geardona (talk to me?) 01:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have continued in earnest, only reverting clear vandalism. Geardona (talk to me?) 22:59, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Geardona: sorry for the delayed reply, have been away from the desk for most of the day. Will have a quick review of your recent edits in a little while and see if I have any useful advice. As a general point there is no prohibition on doing vandalism reverts, and it's an essential task for the wiki overall. So provided you proceed carefully, all should be fine. :) -- Euryalus (talk) 23:41, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks! Geardona (talk to me?) 23:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think I could return to having rollback in good standing or should I wait a few days/week/months/years/decades/centuries (past months is a joke(I hope)) Geardona (talk to me?) 18:30, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd wait a couple of months. It's not essential for anti-vandalism work and the request is more likely to be approved if there's a reasonable time between removal and application. -- Euryalus (talk) 06:41, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I put it on the spam blacklist, citing an earlier conversation with Mitch Ames on the log, which I only just found out about (after having previously cleaned up some of the latest spam of that site). Six spamming attempts are more than enough. Graham87 (talk) 05:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Graham87: thanks for that. Have to admire their persistence but they're aware that this is commercial link spam and seem to think brute forcing it back into articles will eventually pay off. Ah well. Oh and Happy New Year. -- Euryalus (talk) 05:19, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

• Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

• Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
• Community feedback is
  WP:AE
  .

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2024 Steward elections will begin on 06 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 27 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• A vote to ratify the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found here.
• Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes. Read more
• The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in February 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with {{Unreferenced}}. You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

---

Hi, you protected this page back in 2020. I don't really think this article needs to be protected anymore - there's been no disruption in the page history whatsoever except for a brief spurt of IP editwarring in 2020 when you protected it. Can you please unprotect this page? Regards,

]

@Prodraxis: done. -- Euryalus (talk) 01:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).

Guideline and policy news

• requests for adminship process
  .
• Following an RfC, the inactivity requirement for the removal of the interface administrator right increased from 6 months to 12 months.

Technical news

• The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous

• The 2024 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Doǵu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, MdsShakil, Minorax, Nehaoua, Renvoy and RoySmith as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
• Following the 2024 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Ajraddatz, Albertoleoncio, EPIC, JJMC89, Johannnes89, Melos and Yahya.

---

@Jonathan Engel (researcher): thanks for the email. Happy to complete a survey but prefer to do so on-wiki. If you post the questions on this page I'll answer them here.

If that doesn't work for I understand and thanks anyway for the offer. -- Euryalus (talk) 05:14, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I honenstly struggle to see how the expression "Skullbreaker" is not blatantly violent. The example I cited and every example you cited are direclty related to violence and harm (actual or depictions of). In indicating that you feel this is not a blatant expression of violence - would you mind elaborating on what then constitutes a blatant expression of violence? If it is possible to link me to some examples of deleted usernames that fall within this category it would help (I did try searching the page history at UAA, but did not have much luck). Thank you, Goldsztajn (talk) 13:45, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of transparency, I've asked the editor in question ({{noping|SkullbreakerDFA}}) about the origin of their username. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 13:57, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An update: following my engagement with the editor they changed their useranme. I still remain interested in understanding your views on what is (and isn't) a blatant expression of violence. To be clear, I'm glad you declined as this produced a far better outcome than a blocked editor, rather at first instance we have an editor who is engaged with others and editing. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 21:39, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay, was away a few days. Agree that talking to the user generated a good outcome, well done with that. It doesn't seem like they meant any harm with the name but am glad they've decided to go with something else. It also indicated why they'd picked this name (the Fortnite reference and not the stupid falling-over meme). As mentioned at UAA the "Skullbreaker" name has other possible interpretations such as a character in Call of Duty, an obtainable weapon in World of Warcraft and an alternate name for a medieval samurai blade. Or a username from another website, as in this case. Where the name is ambiguous some follow-up is usually required.

Re violent usernames, am reluctant to highlight too many but as examples of usernames that are blatantly violent and deserving of an immediate block perhaps have a look at the Special:ListUsers starting at with "Kill all." A more specific example is this one from a troll of yesteryear. What these have in common is their unarguable call for violence against named groups or individuals. This contrasts with usernames which simply mention objects you could hit someone with, or actions that might cause generic harm. There's nothing unarguably wrong, for example, with a User:Hammer or User:Drivingtoofast. Of course context also matters: had the user called themselves "Skullbreaker" and then edited to promote breaking people's skulls they would likely have been blocked. However in this case the name alone, without supporting evidence or follow-up, didn't meet the policy standard for an immediate block.

Hope that explains what I was thinking in this case. People's mileage can also vary in interpreting any policy, but for me personally the outcome in this case seems to support the decisions to not block on first sight. Either way, happy to discuss further if required. -- Euryalus (talk) 02:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Euryalus - thank you for taking the time to explain with nuance. For some context, my initial response to this was to engage the editor, but when using Twinkle to tag the user page, the instruction contained there indicated that in cases of violence to go straight to UAA and *not* engage. The links you provide and the elements you describe in your consideration are all very helpful. Again, appreciate you taking the time. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 19:30, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).

Administrator changes

• Kbdank71
• Kosack
• NrDg
• TLSuda

Guideline and policy news

• An
  contentious topics procedure
  .

Technical news

• The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

• An arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".

Miscellaneous

• Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

---

I saw you just reverted this edit. Please see these two edits, as well. I'm not sure what's going on, but this editor is causing (rather than addressing) disruption, and I think they need some admin attention. Grandpallama (talk) 21:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, give me a sec. -- Euryalus (talk) 21:31, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day! Hi Euryalus! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]