User talk:Wugapodes/Archive 23

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.

It seems like you are still working on it, but I wanted to express my appreciation for what I think are two fair and thorough section closes so far. --JBL (talk) 00:55, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

@JayBeeEll: Thank you for the kind words. I don't think I have it in me to "close" the rest of it in my usual "summarize the main points" way. There's too much and it's mostly an airing of grievances. I've got a train to catch and am pretty spent, so I'm sorry I don't have more thoughts. At the least I hope things improve. — Wug·a·po·des​ 01:14, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh, ha, gosh, I certainly didn't mean to suggest that you should have more to say -- indeed I can't imagine how one could summarize the main points in the very first section there in any meaningful way (for the reasons you note). Hope the train ride is comparatively smooth! :) --JBL (talk) 01:24, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

@

C'est la vie, I suppose. — Wug·a·po·des

​ 22:50, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

I want to add my thanks as well. Good job. Paul August ☎ 10:53, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

I appreciate the feedback, Paul August, and thank you for taking time to participate in the discussions. — Wug·a·po·des​ 22:50, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello Wugapodes! You recently closed the discussion on the Administrator's Noticeboard in regard to editor Lightburst and their six month ban. My question is: should that user's comments in active AfDs be struck? Thank you. --Kbabej (talk) 22:34, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

@Kbabej: To my knowledge there's no policy saying to do so. Personally I would let them be if they were comments from before the ban. I trust closing administrators are aware of the situation and will weigh the comments appropriately when evaluating consensus. — Wug·a·po·des​ 22:46, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

That sounds fair. Thank you for your thoughts! Have a good weekend. --Kbabej (talk) 22:48, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Template:Broken wikitext has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:09, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Good stuff. This songspam's on me! El_C 23:30, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

I was expecting the Camila Cabello song but now I will be haunted by the Spirits of Havana (Halloween was last week!). I tried to read that thread multiple times and for the life of me couldn't figure out what was going on. Turns out sometimes you do want to diffuse conflict. — Wug·a·po·des​ 23:47, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Heh, same. Eyes glazed over. BTW, speaking of Halloween, I think this year my Nightmare Expo'ing has taken spooky to a whole other level! User_talk:El_C#Boo! El_C 23:57, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Look what you made me do! I also never realized that "Nexpo" meant anything. Haven't seen the two you posted, but if you want spooky I watched "The Cult in a boarding school" a few months ago and just kept thinking "damn, sounds like ANI if we made it a boarding school". — Wug·a·po·des​ 00:20, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your service to the Gugas. I'm still not convinced that show isn't some elaborate hoax and/or shared hallucination. clpo13_(talk) 00:26, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm sure it's a psychogenic real show. Seems the goal is to educate children about food deserts and their harms with anti-corporation and pro-organic undertones. — Wug·a·po·des​ 00:35, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

It's on the que, Wugapodes. Yeah, you gotta be an old school Nexpo fan for the longform. ;) He's at the top of his game with those 2 videos. Strong recommend for extra-potent disturbance (+WARNING). That's right, clpo13, I'm raising awareness of this growing danger. BTW, I'm watching Inversion (just saw latest ep today) and I'm pretty sure at this point the invading species are Guga. El_C 00:43, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Yeah I'm surprised the youtube algo hadn't already recommended them to me. I'm a big fan of psychological thrillers, so I'm always excited to watch new Nexpo content. The whole guga thing just reminds me that children's TV is just universally strange. Hadn't heard about invasion (inversion?) yet, but we just got Apple TV+ to watch Foundation which has been underwhelming (compared to the book at least). — Wug·a·po·des​ 01:42, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

See User_talk:Valereee/Archive_40#Inversion_(2021_TV_series), where I too had noted some of Foundation's shortcomings. BTW, she never con-firmed. Anyway, the thing with some of these layered mind fuck genres like those 2 vids is that without Nexpo's curation, I don't think it's something I'd be able (or even want) to digest. Because the audio-visuals showcase symbolism of whatever lore, sometime as unconscious messages outright. So for example, when he adjusts the lighting to show something hidden, as a viewer I'd never bother going to those lengths. Or playing something backwards and so on. And of course his narration is bar none. I'll close by saying that it was pretty fitting my first encounter with a Guga was around Halloween... El_C 03:10, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Um...yes, I like websites? :D —valereee (talk) 11:47, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

20:35, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for taking the time to be my mentor. I doubt I will be a big editor but I am looking to build a personal profile page on myself. How are personal pages created? Kind regards. --Prof Fintech (talk) 15:01, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi

we welcome subject-matter experts and look forward to your contributions! Let me know if you need any help along the way. — Wug·a·po·des

​ 19:43, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment

Your feedback is requested at

22:05, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Wugapodes, I just looked at the backlog report and

@Kusma: Done, see Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Report/Backlog archive/top — Wug·a·po·des​ 23:59, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! I think the relevant section at Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Report could also do with such a legend. —Kusma (talk) 09:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Also done — Wug·a·po·des​ 22:09, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at

. | Sent at 13:30, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Five years!

Thank you for standing for arbcom - I'll support! - Just for fun: you know what I expect from an arb ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:18, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Template:LoL Item has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Did Q28 make a mess today? 04:40, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

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

Hi, I posted a question, on the Teahouse some time ago. I found some responses somewhat hostile, but recently discovered that the term "egregious" has indeed a more negative than formal connotation in modern English, which explains what happened a bit better than what I thought at that time. I thought of giving an apology there, but I guess it would now make more bad than good, and noticed your response. I did some legwork visible at User_talk:176.247.159.174 and made a little mess by unintentionally pinging lots of people. Some responses were welcoming, other pretty suspicious, can't really tell how justified this was in each case, but that lead me to abandon the task. I stated my research with a critic disposition, but found that the number of indef talk page protections is indeed negligible, but would be happy if my "research" would serve some purpose and guess some admin, you or some other interested one, would hand this better. The lists on that page should be accurate, I removed Talk:Anita Sarkeesian, because it seemed pretty similar to other cases from the following year, otherwise things should be well documented. My interactions with the blocking administrators should be retrievable by the contributions of the IPs who edited the linked IP talk page. As for my inclusion criteria: there were a lot of protected talk page archives, I don't see many good reasons why anyone should edit them and they made this kind of search more tedious, but that's pretty much all (other subpages were FAQs, copyrights or similar); I searched excluding redirects, which somehow excluded things like the main page, policies and help, which are likely protected for a good reason, the redirects that were left probably had some technical problem (the first example is Talk:Grawp, guess the other ones follow a similar pattern); for the disambiguations there was the arguably funny Talk:forum and the self explanatory talk:poop, possibly a couple of other exemples, but nothing that looked really out of place. I'm aware that you are currently running for ArbCom, so feel free to delay the answer or redirect me to some other admin/experienced user that may have more time and interest in similar tasks (frankly, given the size of enwiki, this doesn't seem to be a systemic problem, more a clean up for things that went annoticied, a case by case judgment seems both viable and appropriate in any case).176.247.193.5 (talk) 03:25, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

20:01, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

I am encouraged by your optimistic response to my question.

I would like to see a program where people who work on common freelancing websites will be solicited by generalized job notices for "editing wikipedia". The interview questions should stipulate prior paid commenting or voting work. The interviewer should then offer a bounty in return for information about the employer. This would be sort of like a sting operation, in that the prospective freelance employees would initially think this is just another job where they get paid to vote and comment. Only after a bit of online conversation between the interviewer and the prospective employee would the true nature of the project be established. The bounty payment should be enough to cover the freelancer's lost income for the next month, which is roughly how long the tutoring program would take. I am not completely sure what the amount should be, but for the program to work it must be competitive with what their enwiki employers are paying.

One month should be long enough to have individual tutors from enwiki--probably volunteer--but maybe WMF staff-- to work through the basics of wiki syntax and how to write a good article. The longstanding and legitimate, though seldom-utilized enwiki incentive page could be incorporated into this project somehow. Or as an alternative, the existing interwiki request pages could be modified to fit this project.

The tutoring project should have an achievable objective, such as to prepare the non-English speakers to create a decent article in their own language, or to translate an English article to their own language. Both are marketable skills that they could advertise on the various freelancing websites. The skills learned would have a very limited degree of transfer offwiki--I'm thinking of wordpress.

An English speaking editor could volunteer as a tutor in exchange for having the non-English speakers work on translating articles of their choosing into their own native language wikis. Articles which they want to see translated could be posted the incentive site or interwiki site(s). A "fair" exchange of time could be arranged, such as 1 hour of tutoring via online chat or skype in return for, say, 500 mainbody words of translation. This would have to be arranged on the honor system.

The ultimate outcome of the project would be to convert the current body of lower-skill freelancers to either higher skill freelancers or independent volunteer editors. Higher-skill freelancers will be able to charge more for their work, which should help reduce the likelihood of recidivism into paid commenting and voting in the years following their participation in the program. My opinion is that paid commenters and voters are not interested in corrupting enwiki decision making processes; they just see it as any old job, and as a task that is simple enough to do with a lower degree of wikipedia experience.

Enforcement-wise, I see the bulk of present-day enforcement in this general area going against the non-English speaking editors, and also most enforcement going to paid editing policy violations in articlespace. The outcome of this project would be to step up enforcement against the sort of paid editing which is intended to subvert Wikipedia's consensus-building structures, and to levy the penalties against the employers rather than the employees.

The program could taper off once employers' behavior changes, and the current practice of paid voting and commenting becomes less common.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

@

WikiEdu organization which already leads editor trainings. They might be able to help with training sessions which would be one less thing for you to worry about. I would suggest you spend some time thinking about how this could scale up. What's the minimal viable product that you could pitch as a pilot program? What will your key performance indicators be and what objective measures will you use to evaluate success or failure? If it works well, how do you plan to scale this up to a working group or organization? How much would you plan to spend on each recruit, and what do you expect the budget to be? Thinking through and having answers to these questions will help you pitch the idea to funding agencies and potential partner organizations. The WMF has a lot of money, so think about what you need first and we can pare down the budget later. When I'm not traveling (next week), I'll dig up some resources on the grants processes for you. In the meany, if you need help figuring this out, let me know and I'll try and point you in the right direction! — Wug·a·po·des

​ 08:00, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

A week or so should give me some time to think about it. If there is someone from the WMF who is interested in running such a program, even without the sting/bounty component, that would be great. Coming up with details is the fun part. If I can flesh this out enough to interest others, while still letting people more influential than me design and take ownership of it, it is more likely to succeed.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 15:31, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

I was wondering if you have thoughts on the comment you made here a month ago (scroll to the bottom), in light of the fact that both accounts that were participating in the discussion were indeed sock puppets of an indef banned user [6] [7] and your "warning" was an extremely one sided commination which basically SUPPORTED these pretty obvious sock accounts and threatened long standing users, myself included, who were just stating the obvious. I'm concerned that if you're on the Committee and there are requests for Arbitration or such, made in particularly sensitive areas, this kind of lack of sound judgement can be easily exploited by the perennial, long term and unscrupulous sock masters (since this may be of limited interest to others I'm not posting this on the Questions for Candidates page). Volunteer Marek 08:17, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

I gave my thoughts the last time I was pinged about this. Of the six diffs I provided one turned out to involve a now-blocked sockpuppet. That one I pointed out because it demonstrates the sock accusations were being made off-handedly: "Piotrus questions Astral Leap's motives claiming AL is a 'relative newcomer' and asking how and why they are interested in this discussion, despite both AL and Piotrus having commented in the November 2020 discussion on E-960's ban scope." The rest of the diffs I linked are replies to editors who are not sock-blocked, and the socks weren't even part of the discussion at that point. Of the forty comments in the thread at that point, two of them were from now-blocked socks (one comment eacheach). The vast majority were you and others fighting with Levivich and François Robere (yet again), and I told you all to cut it out and use appropriate reporting venues to handle the two accounts you thought were socking. Keen observers will also note that of the three diffs I gave related to your conduct, none involved sock puppets and two involved you bickering with those users specifically. While you may think that shows a "lack of sound judgment", I think it demonstrates that I can focus on the core of a long-standing dispute between established editors without getting bogged-down by isolated incidents; qualities that I think make for a good arbitrator. — Wug·a·po·des​ 10:26, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Well, thanks for responding. Volunteer Marek 16:26, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Since I can't vote for you, I'll do some campaigning in your favor! What do I do? Let me know on my talk page. BubbaDaAmogus (talk) 00:39, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

21:14, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Wugapodes: i try creating redirects in a mainspace but it doesn't appear, can you fix this bug? Vitaium (talk) 00:06, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

@Vitaium: Can you be more specific about how you tried to create the redirect? To create a redirect on a non-existent page, you need to click the ♑ that appears next to the title. This will then open the interface so that you can create a new redirect. — Wug·a·po·des​ 00:19, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

@

A. C. Santacruz: I left a cautionary note on the editor's talk page, but let me know if there are further problems. — Wug·a·po·des

​ 00:23, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Much appreciated :)

Please ping me!

03:51, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

FYI. Given their mostly constructive history, I wasn't sure if an immediate block was appropriate, so I gave them a final warning. If you think that was too lenient, I'm okay with escalating. clpo13_(talk) 18:45, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, Clpo13. No concerns on my end, but thanks for keeping an eye out! — Wug·a·po·des​ 23:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Assalamualaikum --HussainAhmed44 (talk) 12:57, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

wa ʿalaykumu s-salām HussainAhmed44, I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia, and let me know if you need help with anything! — Wug·a·po·des​ 20:08, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at

21:58, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news

• Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
• The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections is open until 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).
• The already authorized standard
  discretionary sanctions for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), broadly construed, have been made permanent
  .

Hi Wug. Thank you for your courage to run in this year's ACE. This kind of scrutiny can sometimes be as challenging as an RfA - if not worse. Some candidates ran on a platform for changes in Arbcom. Now comes the cliff-hanger of waiting for the results. 52% of the votes were cast on day 1 of the ballot. You might find this analysis of the campaign to be of interest. You are welcome to leave your thoughts on its talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:15, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

A

. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Notification of template substitution

	Greetings, Wugapodes. You are receiving this notification because the process outlined at Administrators without tools. Recently, the following editor(s) received this distinction and the associated endearing title: Narutolovehinata5
Thank you for supporting this effort. Your contributions are an integral part of overall success, and an example for others to follow. To stop receiving these notifications, remove your name from the list.

talk

) 00:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Notification of template substitution

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

talk

) 00:00, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Bots Newsletter, December 2021

Bots Newsletter, December 2021

Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on Phabricator and on MediaWiki.org. BRFA activity by month Welcome to the eighth issue of the English Wikipedia's Bots Newsletter, your source for all things bot. Maintainers disappeared to parts unknown... bots awakening from the slumber of æons... hundreds of thousands of short descriptions... these stories, and more, are brought to you by Wikipedia's most distinguished newsletter about bots. Our last issue was in August 2019, so there's quite a bit of catching up to do. Due to the vast quantity of things that have happened, the next few issues will only cover a few months at a time. This month, we'll go from September 2019 through the end of the year. I won't bore you with further introductions — instead, I'll bore you with a newsletter about bots. Overall Between September and December 2019, there were 33 BRFAs. Of these, Y 25 were approved, and 8 were unsuccessful (N2 3 denied, ? 3 withdrawn, and 2 expired). September 2019 Y Monkbot 16, DannyS712 bot 60, Ahechtbot 6, PearBOT 3, Qbugbot 3 · N2 DannyS712 bot 5, PkbwcgsBot 24 · ? DannyS712 bot 61, TheSandBot 4 TParis goes away, UTRSBot goes kaput: Beeblebrox noted that the bot for maintaining on-wiki records of UTRS appeals stopped working a while ago. TParis, the semi-retired user who had previously run it, said they were "unlikely to return to actively editing Wikipedia", and the bot had been vanquished by trolls submitting bogus UTRS requests on behalf of real blocked users. While OAuth was a potential fix, neither maintainer had time to implement it. TParis offered to access to the UTRS WMFLabs account to any admin identified with the WMF: "I miss you guys a whole lot [...] but I've also moved on with my life. Good luck, let me know how I can help". Ultimately, SQL ended up in charge. Some progress was made, and the bot continued to work another couple months — but as of press time, UTRSBot has not edited since November 2019. Article-measuring contest resumed: The list of Wikipedians by article count, which had lain dead for several years, was triumphantly resurrected by GreenC following a bot request. October 2019 Y OAbot 3, DannyS712 bot 47, Pathbot 2, PearBOT 2, DannyS712 bot 59, DannyS712 bot 62, HasteurBot 14, PearBOT 4, WOSlinkerBot 4, MilHistBot 5 Curb Safe Charmer adopts reFill: TAnthony pointed out that reFill 2's bug reports were going unanswered; creator Zhaofeng Li had retired from Wikipedia, and a maintainer was needed. As of June 2021, Curb Safe Charmer had taken up the mantle, saying: "Not that I have all the skills needed but better me than nobody! 'Maintainer' might be too strong a term though. Volunteers welcome!" November 2019 Y BHGbot 4, YiFeiBot 2, DannyS712 bot III 64 · ? PearBOT Old bots do new tricks: DannyS712 bot III 64 prowled redirects, YiFeiBot 2 archived GoCE requests, and BHGbot 4 removed links to portals deleted at MfD (until its authorization was revoked in January at operator BrownHairedGirl's request). December 2019 Y DemonDays64 Bot, DannyS712 bot III 66, Bot1058 6, Monkbot 15, MilHistBot 6, PearBOT 5, DannyS712 bot IV 65 · N2 SportsStatsBot · Xinbenlv bot, SteveBot 8 Redirects to be autopatrolled: A RfC took place at WP:NPP, closing with unanimous consensus that new redirects should be automatically marked as patrolled by bot. DannyS712 wasted no time, and submitted DannyS712 bot III 66 the next day; it passed two days after that. 200,000 bios get short descs: Along a similar vein, JavaScript Wiki Browser. One particularly neat task, PearBOT 5, automatically generated short descriptions for more than 200,000 biographies. In the next issue of Bots Newsletter: What's next for our intrepid band of coders, maintainers and approvers? What happens when two bots want to clerk the same page? What happens when an adminbot goes hog wild? Will reFill ever get fixed? What's up with ListeriaBot, anyway? Python 3.4 deprecation? In my PyWikiBot? (It's more likely than you think!) These questions will be answered — and new questions raised — by the January 2022 Bots Newsletter. Tune in, or miss out! Signing off... jp×g 04:29, 10 December 2021 (UTC) (You can subscribe or unsubscribe from future newsletters by adding or removing your name from this list.)

Hello --HussainAhmed44 (talk) 15:10, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

22:26, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello.

What edits need to be done on this document? --USWikiUS (talk) 22:47, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi

multiple, independent reliable sources and be written from a neutral, disinterested tone rather than like a company website. The biggest impact you can make right now is to find sources to expand the "Company overview" section by describing the company, its history, and its operations. — Wug·a·po·des

​ 22:56, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Congratulations on winning the ArbCom elections! I, on behalf of all "Intermediate" Wikipedians, I hope to see a big bundle of progress made now. A lot of us editors want to help you make this place better. Thanks for all you do, good luck! BubbaDaAmogus (talk) 14:23, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstar, Bubba, and for the work you've been doing on Western New York articles! I'll do what I can on the Committee to make improvements, but let me know if you ever need a hand. I know a few archivists and librarians in the Buffalo area, so if you ever need access to resources for article writing, let me know and I'll do my best to track them down! — Wug·a·po·des​ 22:37, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

You’re welcome. How do you know all this? Let me know on my talk page. BubbaDaAmogus (talk) 02:18, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Maxim and all those who took the time to research and vote on candidates. I'm already listed at Access to nonpublic personal data policy/Noticeboard, but will double check all the forms and emails later this evening. — Wug·a·po·des​ 23:10, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done — Wug·a·po·des​ 04:26, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

December songs

Congrats to the election! On Beethoven's birthday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:56, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda, especially for the interesting fact! I thought of you today when I saw the audio of Symphony No. 9 (Dvořák) on the main page. Wondered if you had a hand in it! — Wug·a·po·des​ 22:47, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you :) - I had no hand in it until I saw it OTD. DYK that I had my hand in No. 8, in 2013, in response to my second-worst day on WP (yes, because of arbitration, when an arb voted to ban my friend because he uncollapsed an infobox, and not one of his colleague intervened, so not one cared that he had misread the diff ... - hopefully this new 2021 crew will look a bit closer at the so-called evidence), and then listening to that symphony? ... but when resolved found a good hook for it: Birmingham Music. - After I saw No. 9 OTD I added my signature ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:04, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Bringing attention to articles is one of the best features of the main page! People sometimes focus on the negatives of high visibility, but I think one of the main features of a wiki is how more eyes on a page means more things get fixed. I'm glad it gave you the chance to make your mark, and thanks for sharing the 8th Symphony article. That was a fun hook, and I'm sorry it came out of such an unpleasant time. I'm still getting oriented, but my hope is that we can continue to make it better. I doubt it will ever be a pleasant process, but I think we can do more to bring a divided community together. I've been doing some offline reading on

alt text includes the actual score, and it allows readers to listen to the snippet. I think it's a cool extension, and I'm glad the devs managed to fix it a few months ago. — Wug·a·po·des

​ 22:31, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Belated commiserations congratulation! Doug Weller talk 10:33, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Congrats! VR _talk 17:39, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

The Arbitration Committee welcomes the following new and returning arbitrators following their

• talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log
  )
• Cabayi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Donald Albury (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Enterprisey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Izno (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Opabinia regalis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Worm That Turned (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Wugapodes (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

All incoming arbitrators have elected to receive the checkuser and oversight permissions.

We also thank our outgoing colleagues whose terms end on 31 December 2021:

• Casliber (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• David Fuchs (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• KrakatoaKatie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Newyorkbrad (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• SoWhy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Outgoing arbitrators are eligible to retain the CheckUser and Oversight permissions, remain active on cases accepted before their term ended, and to remain subscribed to the functionaries' and arbitration clerks' mailing lists following their term on the committee. To that effect:

• Stewards are requested to remove the permission(s) noted from the following outgoing arbitrators after 31 December 2021 at their own request:

  CheckUser: Casliber, David Fuchs, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy

  Oversight: Casliber, David Fuchs, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy

• Outgoing arbitrators are eligible to remain active on cases opened before their term ended if they wish. Whether or not outgoing arbitrators will remain active on any ongoing case(s) will be noted on the proposed decision talk page of affected case(s).
• All outgoing arbitrators will remain subscribed to the
  functionaries' mailing list
• David Fuchs will be unsubscribed from the
  arbitration clerks' mailing list
  at his request.

For the Arbitration Committee,

Maxim_(talk) 16:00, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard § 2022 Arbitration Committee

22:04, 20 December 2021 (UTC)