User talk:J947/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions with J947. 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.

Hey J947, I thought I'd drop you a line to talk about some of the relists you've been doing over at AfD. I've got a couple of points of feedback:

• Several of your recent relists have been for articles where there is a pretty clear consensus. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University Radio Falmer, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sharn (Forgotten Realms) (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ralph Wolf and Sam Sheepdog... I could go on, but I think you get the picture. No offense, but relists like these come off as careless.
• Several of your relists lately have also been third relists, like
  WP:RELIST, third relists are supposed to be extraordinary measures, not a routine course. Look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2017–18 Under 20 Elite League
  , for example, where Jo-Jo specifically lays out why the third relist was required.

It's great that you want to help the admins out and your effort is appreciated. Just be a little more careful, ok? Thanks A Train^talk 20:16, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry if I'm coming off as badgering, but I'm going through more of the deletion log and pretty much every single relist you've done in your last session is a bad relist. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Strasbourg (506) has not had only a few participants or seems to be lacking arguments based on policy. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ralph Wolf and Sam Sheepdog made me spit my beer out. Maybe take a break from relisting debates at AfD and have a re-read of Wikipedia:Deletion process. A Train^talk 20:37, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@A Train: I'll address all of the relists slowly. First, John Sehil: My relist was basically per Ritchie333; extraordinarily, there were very few good arguments, and I suspected sockpuppetry. Also, I will note that at least 95% of the time when I come across a twice relisted AfD, I do not relist it again. A rare example of a recent AfD I relisted 3 (and 4) times was WP:Articles for deletion/Kilcoole gun-running. Plus, many other relisters relist thrice, even on soft deletion-eligible AfDs. J947^{( c ) (m)} 20:50, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My dude/ette, I know you're no the only one relisting things thrice. But that doesn't put you in the right, it just means you have plenty of company in the wrong. I'm a big

WP:IAR guy, but I tend to break on the "don't create unnecessary work for other volunteers" side of that. Listen, if you're writing out a big defence, don't worry about it. I'm not here to get up your craw, I just hope you'll put some more consideration in before you decide to go closing AfD debates. A Train^talk 21:23, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

Alex Shih^Talk 05:06, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was quick! :) J947^{( c ) (m)} 05:11, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Jane Kardi (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Sereja Tkachenko (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

references like that? check please thank u!

• Sorry
  general notability guideline, and think whether Tkachenko meets those guidelines. J947^{( c ) (m)} 18:21, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Hi J947,

When I get home from school I will add refernces. Please don't delete the article.

Dylan Cricketer993 (talk) 01:16, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Don't worry Cricketer993, you have 7 days to add references. Thanks for the note. J947^{( c ) (m)} 01:49, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• I have added a reference. Is it ok if I remove the tag now? Cricketer993 (talk) 06:14, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• CB at BIICL (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:British Institute of International and Comparative Law (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Please would you explain why you rejected the page so that I can edit and re-submit. I am a novice user of Wikipedia so please explain in simple terms. Thanks CB at BIICL (talk) 08:55, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

J947, not sure whether you can see the deletion log entry. If not, here's what's recorded: "Expired PROD, concern was: A WP:PROMO page on an unremarkable organisation; significant RS coverage not found. I was able to confirm that the org exists and conducts res...)" Hope this helps. Schwede66 10:04, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can see the deletion log through

AFCH, but thanks for the reminder anyways. J947^{( c ) (m)} 17:34, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

@

general notability guideline and decide whether you think the British Institute of International and Comparative Law meets that. J947^{( c ) (m)} 17:34, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Why did you remove the contents of the Manoel Island Football Ground page please? Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MTax00 (talk • contribs) 22:15, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• @MTax00: You were supposed to add the content to Draft:Manoel_Island_Football_Ground. Please add any more content there. J947^{( c ) (m)} 22:25, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello J947, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
• We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

• Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see
  User:Primefac/revdel
  .

General project update:

• The Article Wizard has been updated and simplified to match the layout style of the new user landing page. If you have not yet seen it, take a look.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

Hi, J947, I would like you to possibly alter or vacate your close at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anait Isahanova.Sources presumably exist, one-word-!votes without reasoning et al have never been good arguments in any AfD and the correct steps on the AFD at that point of time would have been either a NC close or a relist!Regards:)Winged Blades of Godric^{On leave} 11:26, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Godric on Leave: I've added a rationale. J947^{( c ) (m)} 18:39, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please stop immediately relisting every discussion that hits "Old Business" at MfD? MfD is a bit of an oddball in that not every discussion needs to be hashed out to the same extent that AfD requires. In many cases, a single comment can provide a sensible, obvious solution and no further comments get made because the regulars can see that no further comments are necessary. Recent examples include Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User 2017 wildfire (obvious userfy), Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Medieval England (request to userfy and no opposition), and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Finetooth/South Fork Clackamas River (histmerge). The problem is compounded because I'm basically the only admin who regularly haunts MfD, so if I don't log on and immediately close the discussions, you relist them right away and we wind up with functionally-complete discussions cycling endlessly through MfD because I wasn't on for a day. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:57, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Premeditated Chaos: Thanks for the comment. I was unaware of that. Not cycling endlessly though as I'll leave it after two relists as too dangerous for a NAC/NAR. I'll remember this advice under future reviewing. BTW, is the 'Old Business' updated daily only? I often see discussions that have been on for over 7 days still in the normal section. J947^{( c ) (m)} 04:15, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, not literally endlessly, but 21 days for a non-controversial discussion to cycle through MfD can feel endless. Relists are helpful if there's an ongoing discussion, or new information comes up that might sway the participants (in those cases it would be useful to include a comment in your relist). But otherwise it's ok to wait a bit and see if someone putters along to close it up.

Old Business is updated approximately daily, I think, check Legobot's edits in the history to confirm. The oldest discussions I've seen outside of it were 8 days, which I think is pretty tolerable all things considered. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:31, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Your signature is causing four lint errors. The technical explanation here is slightly oversimplified, but it identifies the problems and solution.

Your signature

<font color="#1009bf">'''[[User:J947|J]]</font><font color="#137412">[[User talk:J947|947]]</font>'''<sup><sup><sup>( [[Special:Contributions/J947|c]] ) <sup>([[Special:EmailUser/J947|m]])</sup></sup></sup></sup>

displaying as

J947^{( c ) (m)}

generates a misnested tag, and a newly-identified lint error, Tidy bug affecting font tags wrapping links, which is that Wikipedia's parser software changes <font>[[foo|bar]]</font> to [[foo|<font>bar</font>]], but as we upgrade to HTML5, the parser software will stop doing that.

Your signature line is pre-processed to solve the misnested tag and to move the <font> tag inside the brackets:

'''[[User:J947|<font color="#1009bf">J</font>]][[User talk:J947|<font color="#137412">947</font>]]</font>'''<sup><sup><sup>( [[Special:Contributions/J947|c]] ) <sup>([[Special:EmailUser/J947|m]])</sup></sup></sup></sup>

displaying as J947^{( c ) (m)}

but <font> moving step will disappear before long.

It's questionable whether it's a good idea to override default link colors, but if you must do so, move the font tags inside the link brackets and after the pipe (|). And, while you are about it, please be aware that <font> tags are deprecated and will eventually be ignored (these are the remaining two lint errors); <span style ...> is used instead. Your sig file, preserving your link color overrides, would be:

'''[[User:J947|<span style="color: #1009bf;">J</span>]][[User talk:J947|<span style="color: #137412;">947</span>]]'''<sup><sup><sup>( [[Special:Contributions/J947|c]] ) <sup>([[Special:EmailUser/J947|m]])</sup></sup></sup></sup>

displaying as

J947^{( c ) (m)}

Without the link color overrides:

'''[[User:J947|J]][[User talk:J947|947]]'''<sup><sup><sup>( [[Special:Contributions/J947|c]] ) <sup>([[Special:EmailUser/J947|m]])</sup></sup></sup></sup>

displaying as

J947^{( c ) (m)}

Note that the links to your user talk page do not work here because this is already your user talk page; if this were not your talk page, in the final example above, "947" would typically appear as a blue or purple link, depending on whether the user had recently been to your talk page.—Anomalocaris (talk) 21:53, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed! J947^{( c ) (m)} 03:11, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! —Anomalocaris (talk) 20:07, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

Longhair • Megalibrarygirl • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93

Allen3 • Eluchil404 • Arthur Rubin • Bencherlite

Technical news

• The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team is creating an "Interaction Timeline" tool that intends to assist administrators in resolving user conduct disputes. Feedback on the concept may be posted on the talk page.
• A new function is now available to edit filter managers that will make it easier to look for multiple strings containing spoofed text.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors will be invited to submit candidate statements for the 2017 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 12 until November 21. Voting will begin on November 27 and last until December 10.
• Following a request for comment, Ritchie333, Yunshui and Ymblanter will serve as the Electoral Commission for the 2017 ArbCom Elections.

Obituaries

• The Wikipedia community has recently learned that Allen3 (William Allen Peckham) passed away on December 30, 2016, the same day as JohnCD. Allen began editing in 2005 and became an administrator that same year.

Kia Ora! You are listed on the Adopt-an-editor page as possibly looking for an adoptee... Are you still looking for one? I'm a new editor and am looking to be adopted. there is a lot to learn! Let me know! Fusion2186 (talk) 23:36, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello J947. In

@

RfD also. J947^{( c ) (m)} 19:11, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello J947. Regarding the proposed deletion of the Steve Laury article. I noticed that in the last week there have been massive edits to this article after years of very low activity. I suspect some sort of editing mischief, as most of the data which was in this article is now gone. Can you revert back to the version of 23:20 November 1, 2017 before all this mass editing began? Also, the talk page for the article indicates that Steve Laury himself, or someone claiming to be Steve Laury may have performed these edits. BobCC (talk) 15:30, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BobCC, the vandalism was dealt with last night. The page has been restored to an older version and semi-protected. Primefac (talk) 15:34, 20 November 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]

Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FYI that I also confirmed your sock for a week. I'm assuming you'll hit 10 edits with it before then. TonyBallioni (talk) 04:25, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TonyBallioni: Thanks. I wasn't sure whether to place a request in both as I thought that having EC would cover AC/C. And yeah, I probably will hit 10 edits quite soon. J947 ^{(c · m)} 04:28, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. Autoconfirmed is a check that the MediaWiki software does with every edit you make, and if you don't pass the check, you need the confirmed right to do certain actions. Extended confirmed is simply a user right that allows you to edit ECP pages. Despite the common name, the two actually aren't related at all. TonyBallioni (talk) 04:31, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

Joe Roe

JzG

Ericorbit • Perceval • Thingg • Tristanb • Violetriga

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.

Technical news

• Wikimedians are now invited to vote on the proposals in the 2017 Community Wishlist Survey on Meta Wiki until 10 December 2017. In particular, there is a section of the survey regarding new tools for administrators and for anti-harassment.
• A new function is available to edit filter managers which can be used to store matches from regular expressions.

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is open until Sunday 23:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC). There are 12 candidates running for 8 vacant seats.

Miscellaneous

• Over the last few months, several users have reported
  WP:RFPP
  . It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
• The
  Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page
  , and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.

Hello, J947. Voting in the

2017 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I backed out your keep close here and relisted. None of the keep !votes addressed the nomination or provided policy-based reasons to keep the article. A no consensus close might have been justified, but I think it would be better to get more discussion either way. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:46, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@

notability-based reasoning. Anyhow I already knew you'd changed it via Echo. I'll comment there in order to get some policy-based analysis on the article's inclusion. J947 ^{(c · m)} 03:50, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

That's fine: I don't have a dog in the fight, as it were. The arguments were essentially MUSTBESOURCES without providing a reason why we should assume this under

WP:NPOSSIBLE. I used the echo system to let you know, but I also always like leaving a note. All the best. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:53, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello J947, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 12713 pages. Please consider reviewing even just a few pages each day! If everyone helps out, it will really put a dent in the backlog.
• Currently the backlog stretches back to March and some pages in the backlog have passed the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing some of them!

Outreach and Invitations:

• If you know other editors with a good understanding of Wikipedia policy, invite them to join NPP by dropping the invitation template on their talk page with: {{subst:NPR invite}}. Adding more qualified reviewers will help with keeping the backlog manageable.

New Year New Page Review Drive

• A backlog drive is planned for the start of the year, beginning on January 1st and running until the end of the month. Unique prizes will be given in tiers for both the total number of reviews made, as well as the longest 'streak' maintained.
• Note: quality reviewing is extremely important, please do not sacrifice quality for quantity.

General project update:

• BLPPROD
  candidates in the new page feed. However, the majority of the backlog still dates back to before ACTRIAL started, so consider reviewing articles from the middle or back of the backlog.
• The NPP Browser can help you quickly find articles with topics that you prefer to review from within the backlog.
• To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC) [reply]

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:11, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello J947, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1^st and run until January 29^th. Prize tiers and other info can be found

HERE

.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

• The total number of reviews completed for the month.
• The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

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.

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC) [reply]

• I'll help! I haven't done NPP in a while though. J947 ^{(c · m)} 20:30, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm personally not willing to delete the redirect until the ACE2017 template isn't pointing at it any more, but someone else might disagree. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:48, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Done. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:53, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, (edit conflict). :) My text was I've fixed the link on the template. Thanks for reminding me! (Though couldn't you have done it?). J947 ^{(contribs · mail)} 21:57, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please do User:J947/Notability standards as well? J947 ^{(contribs · mail)} 22:00, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping. J947 ^{(contribs · mail)} 22:05, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I could have done it, but I might have removed the link in the template instead of redirecting it like you did, so it was better to leave it to you to handle. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 23:43, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay; that's perfectly reasonable. J947 ^{(contribs · mail)} 03:06, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

Muboshgu

Anetode • Laser brain • Worm That Turned

None

Bureaucrat changes

Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

• A
  WP:RFA
  and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news

• The 2017 Community Wishlist Survey results have been posted. The Community Tech team will investigate and address the top ten results.
• The Anti-Harassment Tools team is inviting comments on new blocking tools and improvements to existing blocking tools for development in early 2018. Feedback can be left on the discussion page or by email.

Arbitration

• Following the results of the 2017 election, the following editors have been (re)appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Alex Shih, BU Rob13, Callanecc, KrakatoaKatie, Opabinia regalis, Premeditated Chaos, RickinBaltimore, Worm That Turned.

Due to the fact that

• @RekishiEJ: Thanks for the archiving. Yeah I noticed that someone forgot to put their Sig and thought it was me but didn't have the time to check. J947 ^{(contribs · mail)} 21:23, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you find time for it could you take a look at my recent noms at TAFI

Okay, I'll put some input there! J947 ^{(contribs · mail)} 21:26, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 02:21, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply

@Mike Christie: Finally! I'm not particularly active now though. J947 ^(c), at 03:52, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article

Hello. Could I ask you to check and, if necessary, update your availability details at Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area/Adopters, please?

I've been updating that page, plus the list of over 100 people seeking adoption (which I've now stripped down to around 20 active editors genuinely seeking help.

I've been working to identify those Adopters who are currently available, and those who haven't been active on Wikipedia for a while. But I don't think the bot has been updating correctly, so a manual check from you would be really helpful. I've also made some suggestions and a few edits to make life easier for newcomers. I've put some of my observations down in answer to a recent post about inactivity of some Adopt-a-User Project contributors. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:41, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I'm not currently available. J947 ^(c), at 05:17, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On

Colony of Cape Breton, Richard Gibbons founded a group that was later banned as being a possible "Seed of Rebellion"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Richard Gibbons (jurist). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Richard Gibbons (jurist)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page

.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article

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

Administrator changes

None

Blurpeace • Dana boomer • Deltabeignet • Denelson83 • Grandiose • Salvidrim! • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC
  Wikipedian-in-Residence
  or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
• Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.

Technical news

• A
  automatic edit summaries
  .

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee
  standardized editnotice
  when placing page restrictions. Editors cannot be sanctioned for violations of page restrictions if this editnotice was not in place at the time of the violation.

Hello J947, thank you for your efforts in reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

• The new page backlog is currently at 3819 unreviewed articles, with a further 6660 unreviewed redirects.
• We are very close to eliminating the backlog completely; please help by reviewing a few extra articles each day!

New Year Backlog Drive results:

• We made massive progress during the recent four weeks of the NPP Backlog Drive, during which the backlog reduced by nearly six thousand articles and the length of the backlog by almost 3 months!

General project update:

• ACTRIAL
  will end it's initial phase on the 14th of March. Our goal is to reduce the backlog significantly below the 90 day index point by the 14th of March. Please consider helping with this goal by reviewing a few additional pages a day.
• Reviewing redirects is an important and necessary part of New Page Patrol. Please read the
  RfD
  .

---

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. 20:32, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Hello J947, The possibilities of getting unblocked is just too small. The admins well not mentor me as it was suggested by User:Floquenbeam, who is quite backed up by a lot of people.

I thank you for your suggestion, but I will have to deny it.

--Weekssonia/IExistToHelp (talk) 05:29, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

Lourdes†

AngelOfSadness • Bhadani • Chris 73 • Coren • Friday • Midom • Mike V

† Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

Guideline and policy news

• The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
• Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
• A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
• A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

Technical news

• CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
• The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2018 Steward elections, the following users are our new stewards: -revi, Green Giant, Rxy, There'sNoTime, علاء.

Obituaries

• Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.

How do I keep Jordan Holland’s page from being deleted? He plays defensive back for the Edmonton Eskimos of the Canadian Football league. He had played for the Cleveland Gladiators and Billings Wolves as well. I even have pictures to prove it. Also how do I add a picture for him? His father is the linebacker coach for the 49ers as wells. Please help me put on this. Wizkid97 (talk) 02:39, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• A reference has been added. J947 ^(c), at 19:29, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Administrator changes

331dot • Cordless Larry • ClueBot NG

Gogo Dodo • Pb30 • Sebastiankessel • Seicer • SoLando

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

• There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee
  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.

• Thanks! :) J947 ^(c), at 05:16, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]