User talk:Wugapodes/Archive 13

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.

17:19, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

14:18, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

... but I'm not happy about the talk page inclusion of DYK noms. I'd remove it the latest when the credit arrives, but don't understand for whom it would be helpful before. If this was discussed, I missed it, sorry. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:00, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Gerda Arendt, are you talking about the dyk helper bot that transcludes the nom to the article talk? —valereee (talk) 11:10, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

discussed on WP:DYK, sorry for not marking moot here --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:25, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

same: today, I was on an article talk page, saw the entry about the DYK nomination, and for first time was glad because I looked for the former hook, which had been changed in the queue (and I forgot that before appearing, it's not there yet, my mistake). In order to copy it, I had to click on "comment" in a discussion marked as closed. Could that be improved? ... could we perhaps have a direct link to the template, on top of the substitution? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:24, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I'm glad you found it useful! I recently changed it per the above discussion with Mandarax, but I'll look into restoring it in a way that makes everyone happy! — Wug·a·po·des​ 22:06, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

May · Mary · Monteverdi

Thank you for article improvements in May! - DYK my list of

people for whose life I'm thankful enough to improve their articles? - I have a FAC open, one of Monteverdi's exceptional works, in memory of Brian who passed me his collected sources. --Gerda Arendt (talk

) 20:47, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

today a composer pictured who wrote a triple concerto for violin, harp and double bass, in honour of the composer who died and my brother who plays double bass. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:53, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).

Administrator changes

CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth

Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

• A
  Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS)
  should allowed any unblock request or just private appeals.
• The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.

Arbitration

• A
  500/30
  restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.

22:32, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Heard of the concept, did initial research to find the first clue, but really had no idea. :D —valereee (talk) 03:52, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

@Valereee: You did a good job starting it; those sources are really good! Verso currently is offering The End of Policing as an e-book for free, so if you want to read it or use it as a source it's available from their website. — Wug·a·po·des​ 04:00, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

21:12, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi there,

A page you fully protected for 7 days (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Assyrian_people&diff=960450782&oldid=960430632) last week is now has no protection. It was under the indefinite semi-protection for persistent unconstructive edits before the additional full-protection (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Assyrian+people) but after the full protection has been expired, the previous semi-protection has also been automatically removed. I thought this was not your intention, so I just wanted to let you know as you might want to restore the previous protection level (before the full protection). This is one of the high-visibility pages in Wikipedia and is notorious for its conflicts. Kind regards, 85.111.53.62 (talk) 09:15, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Done, thanks Anon for letting me know. — Wug·a·po·des​ 19:02, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:18, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

PLS SEE Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Introduction page.--Moxy 🍁 11:24, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

21:38, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Wugapodes,

Your help can make a difference

ACPERM

, your help could really make a difference.

Google Adds New Languages to Google Translate

In late February, Google added 5 new languages to Google Translate: Kinyarwanda, Odia (Oriya), Tatar, Turkmen and Uyghur. This expands our ability to find and evaluate sources in those languages.

Discussions and Resources

• A discussion on handling new article creation by paid editors is ongoing at the Village Pump.
• Also at the Village Pump is a discussion about limiting participation at Articles for Deletion discussion.
• A proposed new speedy deletion criteria for certain kinds of redirects ended with no consensus.
• Also ending with no change was a proposal to change how we handle certain kinds of vector images.

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 10271 Low – 4991 High – 10271

To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Please remember to clear Prep 6. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 23:05, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

... and Prep 7! Yoninah (talk) 23:06, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Forgot to hit save after cut and pasting; both should be cleared now. — Wug·a·po·des​ 23:08, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Yoninah (talk) 23:10, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, thank you! I was under the impression that whoever promotes a set to the queue has to check all the hooks; I hope you get some help! Best, Yoninah (talk) 23:35, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Yup, but the checking isn't really that hard, just tedious. There's a lot of tabs and edit windows open at once, so I sometimes forget which ones I need to hit save on. It tends to be fine though, the DYK regulars are very good about letting me know when I mess up! Hope my promotion of prep 2 didn't mess you up; my thinking was that more empty preps would be helpful. — Wug·a·po·des​ 23:45, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Well, I had just built Prep 2 tonight, and usually Ravenpuff edits it before it's promoted. But he also posts at ERRORS if there's any problem with the wording. So all's good on this end. Thanks again, Yoninah (talk) 23:50, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

No problem, you did most of the hard work! It's still pretty early in my time zone, so if there are any changes that need made to Q2 just ping me or post here and I'll be happy to fix them. Worst case I can just revert the promotion pretty easily. — Wug·a·po·des​ 23:55, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

OK. Do you hear that, Ravenpuff? Yoninah (talk) 00:00, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Noted with thanks,

normally be avoided, though perhaps we could let this one slide because it's in the quirky slot. — RAVENPVFF · talk

 · 03:48, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ravenpuff: I fixed the first one; The Cock hook was actually my favorite, so I'd like it if we could let it slide, but I also thought "that taking pictures of The Cock is prohibited?" might be okay. — Wug·a·po·des​ 06:16, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, that seems fine by me. Pinging nominator Armadillopteryx as a courtesy. — RAVENPVFF · talk · 10:02, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Personally, I like the current phrasing in The Cock hook. Using words like is prohibited is much more formal and cues the reader that we're talking about a place.

Also, in the second hook, 16-year-old needs a second hyphen. Yoninah (talk) 11:05, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

I also think The Cock hook loses some of its hookiness/quirkiness if we change the wording. I guess something like ... that The Cock cannot be photographed? would also work, though I prefer the current version. Armadillopteryx^talk 12:02, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Not sure how semiprotecting creation will help on

Oh duh, right. I've removed it. — Wug·a·po·des​ 23:01, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

18:49, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the close. Meters (talk) 03:14, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

No problem. It was a lot to read but wound up being more straightforward than I expected. — Wug·a·po·des​ 03:34, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Template:SOWL-sfn has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. TheImaCow (talk) 18:28, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

16:31, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Wugapodes. You blocked this IP after I requested page protection for Bourla. Many thanks for that but I see they are back doing the same thing from a different IP address. Could you possibly take a look please. Robvanvee 06:08, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Robvanvee it looks like Johnuniq got there before I did and has protected the page for a few days. Hopefully that helps, but let either of us know if the person comes back after protection expires. — Wug·a·po·des​ 19:26, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Doh! I forgot to let you know, yes. Many thanks for all your help Wugapodes! Robvanvee 19:33, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).

Administrator changes Malcolmxl5 John • TheCoffee • Tim! Creffett → GeneralNotability DeltaQuad → AmandaNP

CheckUser changes Bbb23 Interface administrator changes TonyBallioni

Guideline and policy news

• A
  speedy deletion criterion
  .

Technical news

• Protection templates on mainspace pages are now automatically added by User:MusikBot II (BRFA).

Arbitration

• Following the
  banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC
  and is open to comments from the community.
• The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles.

The third round of the 2020 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it into the fourth round each had at least 353 points (compared to 68 in 2019). It was a highly competitive round, and a number of contestants were eliminated who would have moved on in earlier years. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• Epicgenius, with one featured article, 28 good articles and 17 DYKs, amassing 1836 points
• The Rambling Man , with 1672 points gained from four featured articles and seventeen good articles, plus reviews of a large number of FACs and GAs
• Gog the Mild, a first time contestant, with 1540 points, a tally built largely on 4 featured articles and related bonus points.

Between them, contestants managed 14 featured articles, 9 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 152 good articles, 136 DYK entries, 55 ITN entries, 65 featured article candidate reviews and 221 good article reviews. Additionally, MPJ-DK added 3 items to featured topics and 44 to good topics. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 710 good article reviews, in comparison to 387 good articles submitted for review and promoted. These large numbers are probably linked to a GAN backlog drive in April and May, and the changed patterns of editing during the COVID-19 pandemic. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on

Hi Wugapodes, I think T202989 is waiting for you right now? If so, could you check in on it if you have the time? Best regards, — xaosflux ^Talk 14:34, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: It's next on my to do list; I got sidetracked by some meatspace business. I'm still trying to understand the code better, and I've recently switched operating systems so have run into some problems getting the tests set up again. Slow going but I'm on it! — Wug·a·po·des​ 20:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Template:Manner of articulation has been nominated for merging with Template:Articulation navbox. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Gonnym (talk) 16:00, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Template:Places of articulation mini sidebar has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 16:03, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Article created. Feel free to do whatever you want to do with it. Nardog (talk) 02:54, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@

LabPhon conference, but I look forward to working on it soon! — Wug·a·po·des

​ 05:00, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

20:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I want to use User:WugBot's updating covid-19 datas function in TR Wikipedia. Can you help me? Tekask1903 (talk) 06:28, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tekask1903 I can gladly help. The source code is on GitHub if you want to see it. The easiest way to have WugBot update data on trWikipedia would be to update its code to edit the Turkish pages at the same time it edits the English pages. I see that TR Wikipedia has a bot policy and an approval process. I can't read Turkish, so you would be the one who should ask for approval. You can look at my request to help you fill out the form. While that process happens, I will work on setting the bot to run on the Turkish Wikipedia. — Wug·a·po·des​ 06:43, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay I will refer. Tekask1903 (talk) 06:56, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

• Hi again. We have three templates for daily cases in TR wiki. tr:Şablon:COVID-19 pandemisi günlük verileri/veri. And this template works in this form:

|Country Code (ex:TUR) ={{#switch:{{{2}}}
| 10.04 = {{#switch:{{{3}}} |TARIH = 10 Nisan 2020 |TARIH2 = 10.04.2020|TARIH3 =10 Nisan|TOPLAM VAKA =521|TOPLAM OLUM =15|TOPLAM IYILESENLER=32}}

TOPLAM VAKA=TOTAL CASES TOPLAM OLUM=TOTAL DEATHS TOPLAM IYILESEN=TOTAL RECOVERIES

Can you edit your bot for update this template ?

Also this are 2 others: tr:Şablon:COVID-19 pandemisi günlük verileri2/veri tr:Şablon:COVID-19 pandemisi günlük verileri3/veri

Tekask1903 (talk) 22:53, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@Tekask1903: Yes, though it will take a couple days. — Wug·a·po·des​ 23:55, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

16:30, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

I just saw this, as you'd linked it from the RfArb. Thank you for putting that together—it was interesting to see a formal approach to the question of trend lines. It's always intuitively struck me as a faulty concept, and an example of confirmation bias and overinterpetation of noise. Sort of like repeating statistical significance testing again and again, and then stopping a study once the p value crosses the 0.05 threshold. But it's neat to see formal validation. Thank you for that—I'll remember to bring my R questions to you in the future. :) MastCell ^Talk 17:59, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@

model comparison to figure out which one is more likely given the actual RfA data. If the one with the switch parameter is a better fit, then we can reasonably conclude that exhibit A caused a change in opinion. It's definitely something that can be done, probably in a reasonable length of time too, but making claims about trends with any confidence would require a more rigorous methodology than just looking at the graph. So yeah, that's probably the more nuanced takeaway from that essay: trend lines aren't useless if you want to put in the leg work but most of the time we don't put in the leg work so it's best to just ignore them. And I'm always happy to answer R questions! — Wug·a·po·des

​ 20:23, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Interesting... I see what you're saying. But in this specific case, wouldn't you still be left with the underlying problem of HARKing? I mean, people are looking at a completed/closed discussion, retrospectively picking out a timepoint at which the tide ostensibly turned, then statistically "validating" the timepoint they've chosen. Regardless of the sophistication of the statistical approach, they're formulating a hypothesis retroactively with perfect knowledge of the course of the discussion/dataset. Internally, no doubt, they've considered and rejected a bunch of other potential "turning points", because those don't fit with the data. Formally, these are data-dependent analyses, and, if we were using null-hypothesis significance testing, this would constitute p-hacking. Does that sound right to you?

Like, if I look at the box score of a completed baseball game and notice a scoring trend, and then pick an event that happened somewhere around the time that the trend started, that would be really weak sauce in terms of causal inference. I suppose that if, at the time of a specific comment or event, an editor identified it as a potential tide-turner in real time and then prospectively validated that hypothesis, that might be somewhat stronger—analogous to pre-registration of clinical trials and pre-specification of endpoints.

Anyhow, just thinking out loud. It's a pleasure to have someone to discuss these questions with, and I'm curious about your thoughts. Take care. MastCell ^Talk 21:28, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

@

Bayesian Information Criteria should be large. Even if it was, we would also be able to estimate whether the change is actually consequential. It's possible that we could infer a switch point at the expected time, but that it's only a shift of one or two percentage points and wouldn't actually change the result. I've used rational speech act models which are Bayesian models of pragmatic inference, but switch point problems pretty much never come up so I haven't done one myself. It seems like it would be a good fit for this problem, and it could probably be run on old crat chats. The data should probably be anonymized though since it could be used spuriously to undermine trust in crats and administrative decisions. And no worries about thinking out loud. It's an interesting problem, and it led to two redlinks that should be turned blue so it's helping build the encyclopedia in more ways than one. — Wug·a·po·des

​ 22:43, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, per the first part of this thread, you edited Module:NewDYKnomination to deal with nomination templates containing slashes in their names. Well, we got what I think is the first such nom since then (and the first I ever recall with two slashes). The nomination for Fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium bromide/vilanterol did {{DYK nompage links}} perfectly, with the correct |nompage=, but in the {{DYKmake}}, it got the |subpage= wrong. I'd appreciate it if you could look into this again.... MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 09:36, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

On it — Wug·a·po·des​ 20:27, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

@Mandarax: I believe I've fixed it; also good news BlueMoonset, |subpage= is now added to all DYKmake templates. Let me know if either of you see issues with the update. — Wug·a·po·des​ 00:05, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks again! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:32, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Please could you remove

Done. It was a test page I forgot to delete after updating {{Editnotice}} , thanks for letting me know! — Wug·a·po·des​ 20:20, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Not clear why we would discuss reinstating BLP smears that are not based on the weight of or for that matter on any RS interpretation that supports them. SPECIFICO talk 01:19, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

19:05, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Hey. I've proposed a few changes/additions to the GS system of templates. Wondering if you might be interested / have any thoughts to add, since you created a couple sanction-specific templates in the area. The threads are alert proposals, talk notice proposal, and using alert as a proxy for both DS/GS. Thanks! ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:28, 26 July 2020 (UTC)