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.
To copyvio-revdel or not to copyvio-revdel, that is the question
Evidently you've got criteria for what stays and what goes
[1], but I can't figure it. At this point I'm not even sure that revdels are useful. So, do you want to see all of the old copyvios or only some of them, and if only some can you clarify the criteria pls?
Yappy2bhere (
talk)
22:56, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
@
Yappy2bhere Template all the ones you find. The relevant policy is
Wikipedia:Revision deletion#Large-scale use and the effect of having to delete multiple revisions that may go back several years. This happens because it's not just the revision that the copvio appears in that has to deleted but all subsequent revisions until the revision where the material was removed. In the case of
Raqesh Bapat that would have meant deleting almost 160 revisions by numerous editors going back almost 2 years. In my judgment deleting all those revisions is impractical and simple removal of the offending material is enough.
Nthep (
talk)
23:14, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Following my reverts, the IP copied the entire contents of the page onto their
User talk:49.204.129.5 talkpage and labelled it copyrighted (at the bottom of the page). This has odd similarities to
User:CornyTheEditor which just popped up right after the IP, having also copied huge chunks of metro-related pages and labeling it copyrighted (COPYRIGHT (c)2021 CornyTheEditor) on their userpage.
While I do not wish to accuse the latter of logged-out editing, I would like to request your assistance in warning them on the copyright issue as I am not clear on the right way forward. This does not seem to be a problem that meets the requirements for an ANI case yet. Thank you.
Seloloving (
talk)
10:01, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to the one hundred and sixty second
WikiProject Yorkshire monthly newsletter.
Thanks to the contributions of our many members and supporters,
WP:YORKS has become a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 17,227 last month to 17,270 on 29 September 2021). In the area of GAs
WP:YORKS at 207 is ahead of
WP:GM who have 90.
WP:YORKS also has the lead in FAs at 85 while
WP:GM has 69 out of a total number of 4,690 articles.
Currently we have sixty eight Yorkshire featured articles:
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
WikiProject Yorkshire Collaboration of the Month Project
The October 2021 articles selected below are an editor choice as there were no nominations on the project talk page.
The project is subscribed to a
clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis.
Monitoring is essential Use the
watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR. You will also have to check that the Commons link is set correctly.
Thanks
Comments, questions and suggestions about this, or any, issue of the newsletter are always welcome and can be made by pressing the feedback button below...
Would you like to write the next newsletter for
WP:YORKS? Please nominate yourself at
WT:YORKS! New editors are always welcome!
Delivered October 2021 by
MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.
Following
an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain
high-risk templates.
Following
a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.
A
motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in
the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
Following the closure of the
Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions
are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
The Arbitration Committee
encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.
Miscellaneous
Editors
have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to
add themselves to the mentor list.
The
community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
Hi Nthep—thanks for responding to my revdel request at
Draft:Imperfect War. I didn't realize that the website itself was copying from court cases that are now in the public domain, so I was wondering if you would be willing to un-hide that original revision. Sorry for any inconvenience!
DanCherek (
talk)
18:00, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
You responded to a revdel request I made earlier today and I have another but the issue is that I cannot post it as the URL that is being copied from is blacklisted so I can't post the template.
We're not talking about renaming the article on the
Eirias Stadium to Stadiwm Zip World but referring to the stadium by its common name as a link in articles where the venue is mentioned. So I'll ask again where is the policy that says we shouldn't use the common name?
Nthep (
talk)
20:10, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
They weren't piped links but links to a redirect that refer to the stadium by its common name. If a stadium is best known by its sponsored name why should Wikipedia not refer to it in the same way as the sources?
Nthep (
talk)
20:42, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
For example the lead paragraph of
Manchester City F.C. says " The club's home ground is the Etihad Stadium ..." That's wrong and it should always read "The club's home ground is the City of Manchester Stadium..."? IMO, no as 99% of the time people know the stadium as the Etihad, so why not say North Wales play at Stadiwm Zip World because that's how it gets more commonly referred to?
Nthep (
talk)
20:59, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
Fair point, but a piped link and a straight redirect are functionally the same for a reader. Also, what happens when the stadium inevitably changes names again? –
PeeJay08:44, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Then we use whatever name is common usage at that time. There are stadia better known by their non-sponsored name e.g. very few sources currently refer to Emerald Headingley rather than simply Headingley, but others known almost always their sponsored name in recent seasons e.g. Tetley's stadium rather than Crown Flatt.
Nthep (
talk)
11:52, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Phase 2 of the 2021
RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues
found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.
Thank you so much for the barnstar. I would not have done this if I weren't studying to become a biologist. I have a lot of fun with this one. Thank you for taking the time to verify all of my tags.
Scorpions13256 (
talk)
17:49, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to the one hundred and sixty third
WikiProject Yorkshire monthly newsletter.
Thanks to the contributions of our many members and supporters,
WP:YORKS has become a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 17,270 last month to 17,376 on 7 November 2021). In the area of GAs
WP:YORKS at 205 is ahead of
WP:GM who have 91.
WP:YORKS also has the lead in FAs at 87 while
WP:GM has 70 out of a total number of 4,695 articles.
Currently we have seventy Yorkshire featured articles:
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
Newsletter
At a member's request a new option has been made available for the newsletter delivery. If you do not want the full text of the newsletter delivering each month you can now opt to have just a link to the newsletter sent to your talk page. You can select this option by using L in the Newsletter column against your name on the
project members list.
WikiProject Yorkshire Collaboration of the Month Project
The November 2021 articles selected below are an editor choice as there were no nominations on the project talk page.
The project is subscribed to a
clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis.
Monitoring is essential Use the
watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR. You will also have to check that the Commons link is set correctly.
Thanks
Comments, questions and suggestions about this, or any, issue of the newsletter are always welcome and can be made by pressing the feedback button below...
Would you like to write the next newsletter for
WP:YORKS? Please nominate yourself at
WT:YORKS! New editors are always welcome!
Delivered November 2021 by
MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.
21:47, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 47
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 47, September – October 2021
On-wiki Wikipedia Library notification rolling out
This
post about the question of the week is showing how questions can be answered over Wikidata. Also it gives some insights on how Google and Siri are using Wikidata.
A new openly accessible
book on knowledge graphs has been published by prominent researchers in the field.
Working on displaying the grammatical features of Lexemes in a particular order in the UI (
phab:T232557)
Mismatch Finder: continuing polishing before first release. Focusing on making API documentation available and adding a footer to the site
The ongoing work on MediaWiki skin improvements especially for Wikipedia will break the search box for Wikidata. We're working on addressing this. (
phab:T275251)
Migrating a number of components to vue 3 to keep up with the rest of MediaWiki (
phab:T294465)
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the
Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose
site bans,
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.
Apologies, apparently I did not update the start revision id when using the cv-revdel tool. I have refiled the original copyvio request. Additionally, there is one more (new) instance on the same article by the same editor.
– robertsky (
talk)
00:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your patience. Sorry if I freaked out too much. The only edits I cannot check myself are the ones you just redacted today. They are in my last 100 contributions. Thank you so much for your kindness.
Scorpions13256 (
talk)
20:42, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. I'm calmer now. If you look in my last 100 contributions, you will see the word "presumptive" come up a lot. You redacted the bottom half of the edits, so I can't see what the source was. If they are the same source as the top ones, they can come back.
Scorpions13256 (
talk)
20:51, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
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.
To copyvio-revdel or not to copyvio-revdel, that is the question
Evidently you've got criteria for what stays and what goes
[1], but I can't figure it. At this point I'm not even sure that revdels are useful. So, do you want to see all of the old copyvios or only some of them, and if only some can you clarify the criteria pls?
Yappy2bhere (
talk)
22:56, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
@
Yappy2bhere Template all the ones you find. The relevant policy is
Wikipedia:Revision deletion#Large-scale use and the effect of having to delete multiple revisions that may go back several years. This happens because it's not just the revision that the copvio appears in that has to deleted but all subsequent revisions until the revision where the material was removed. In the case of
Raqesh Bapat that would have meant deleting almost 160 revisions by numerous editors going back almost 2 years. In my judgment deleting all those revisions is impractical and simple removal of the offending material is enough.
Nthep (
talk)
23:14, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Following my reverts, the IP copied the entire contents of the page onto their
User talk:49.204.129.5 talkpage and labelled it copyrighted (at the bottom of the page). This has odd similarities to
User:CornyTheEditor which just popped up right after the IP, having also copied huge chunks of metro-related pages and labeling it copyrighted (COPYRIGHT (c)2021 CornyTheEditor) on their userpage.
While I do not wish to accuse the latter of logged-out editing, I would like to request your assistance in warning them on the copyright issue as I am not clear on the right way forward. This does not seem to be a problem that meets the requirements for an ANI case yet. Thank you.
Seloloving (
talk)
10:01, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to the one hundred and sixty second
WikiProject Yorkshire monthly newsletter.
Thanks to the contributions of our many members and supporters,
WP:YORKS has become a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 17,227 last month to 17,270 on 29 September 2021). In the area of GAs
WP:YORKS at 207 is ahead of
WP:GM who have 90.
WP:YORKS also has the lead in FAs at 85 while
WP:GM has 69 out of a total number of 4,690 articles.
Currently we have sixty eight Yorkshire featured articles:
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
WikiProject Yorkshire Collaboration of the Month Project
The October 2021 articles selected below are an editor choice as there were no nominations on the project talk page.
The project is subscribed to a
clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis.
Monitoring is essential Use the
watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR. You will also have to check that the Commons link is set correctly.
Thanks
Comments, questions and suggestions about this, or any, issue of the newsletter are always welcome and can be made by pressing the feedback button below...
Would you like to write the next newsletter for
WP:YORKS? Please nominate yourself at
WT:YORKS! New editors are always welcome!
Delivered October 2021 by
MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.
Following
an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain
high-risk templates.
Following
a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.
A
motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in
the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
Following the closure of the
Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions
are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
The Arbitration Committee
encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.
Miscellaneous
Editors
have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to
add themselves to the mentor list.
The
community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
Hi Nthep—thanks for responding to my revdel request at
Draft:Imperfect War. I didn't realize that the website itself was copying from court cases that are now in the public domain, so I was wondering if you would be willing to un-hide that original revision. Sorry for any inconvenience!
DanCherek (
talk)
18:00, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
You responded to a revdel request I made earlier today and I have another but the issue is that I cannot post it as the URL that is being copied from is blacklisted so I can't post the template.
We're not talking about renaming the article on the
Eirias Stadium to Stadiwm Zip World but referring to the stadium by its common name as a link in articles where the venue is mentioned. So I'll ask again where is the policy that says we shouldn't use the common name?
Nthep (
talk)
20:10, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
They weren't piped links but links to a redirect that refer to the stadium by its common name. If a stadium is best known by its sponsored name why should Wikipedia not refer to it in the same way as the sources?
Nthep (
talk)
20:42, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
For example the lead paragraph of
Manchester City F.C. says " The club's home ground is the Etihad Stadium ..." That's wrong and it should always read "The club's home ground is the City of Manchester Stadium..."? IMO, no as 99% of the time people know the stadium as the Etihad, so why not say North Wales play at Stadiwm Zip World because that's how it gets more commonly referred to?
Nthep (
talk)
20:59, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
Fair point, but a piped link and a straight redirect are functionally the same for a reader. Also, what happens when the stadium inevitably changes names again? –
PeeJay08:44, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Then we use whatever name is common usage at that time. There are stadia better known by their non-sponsored name e.g. very few sources currently refer to Emerald Headingley rather than simply Headingley, but others known almost always their sponsored name in recent seasons e.g. Tetley's stadium rather than Crown Flatt.
Nthep (
talk)
11:52, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Phase 2 of the 2021
RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues
found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.
Thank you so much for the barnstar. I would not have done this if I weren't studying to become a biologist. I have a lot of fun with this one. Thank you for taking the time to verify all of my tags.
Scorpions13256 (
talk)
17:49, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to the one hundred and sixty third
WikiProject Yorkshire monthly newsletter.
Thanks to the contributions of our many members and supporters,
WP:YORKS has become a leading local British WikiProject in terms of the total number of articles supported (up from 17,270 last month to 17,376 on 7 November 2021). In the area of GAs
WP:YORKS at 205 is ahead of
WP:GM who have 91.
WP:YORKS also has the lead in FAs at 87 while
WP:GM has 70 out of a total number of 4,695 articles.
Currently we have seventy Yorkshire featured articles:
The number has been kept deliberately low to give us a fighting chance of improving them to at least GA status, also so we can concentrate our efforts on these first.
Newsletter
At a member's request a new option has been made available for the newsletter delivery. If you do not want the full text of the newsletter delivering each month you can now opt to have just a link to the newsletter sent to your talk page. You can select this option by using L in the Newsletter column against your name on the
project members list.
WikiProject Yorkshire Collaboration of the Month Project
The November 2021 articles selected below are an editor choice as there were no nominations on the project talk page.
The project is subscribed to a
clean-up listing which lists articles tagged with various clean-up tags that need attention. The listing is refreshed by a bot on a regular basis.
Monitoring is essential Use the
watchlist to keep an eye on changes to the project's articles so that vandalism and spamming can be removed as quickly as possible.
Moves Please be careful when performing articles moves and ensure that you also move all the talk sub-pages and update any image fair use rational. Otherwise the archives, to-do lists, assessment comments and GA reviews get lost and the image may be deleted as it has an incorrect FUR. You will also have to check that the Commons link is set correctly.
Thanks
Comments, questions and suggestions about this, or any, issue of the newsletter are always welcome and can be made by pressing the feedback button below...
Would you like to write the next newsletter for
WP:YORKS? Please nominate yourself at
WT:YORKS! New editors are always welcome!
Delivered November 2021 by
MediaWiki message delivery.
If you do not wish to receive the newsletter, please add an N to the column against your username on the Project Mainpage.
21:47, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes – Issue 47
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 47, September – October 2021
On-wiki Wikipedia Library notification rolling out
This
post about the question of the week is showing how questions can be answered over Wikidata. Also it gives some insights on how Google and Siri are using Wikidata.
A new openly accessible
book on knowledge graphs has been published by prominent researchers in the field.
Working on displaying the grammatical features of Lexemes in a particular order in the UI (
phab:T232557)
Mismatch Finder: continuing polishing before first release. Focusing on making API documentation available and adding a footer to the site
The ongoing work on MediaWiki skin improvements especially for Wikipedia will break the search box for Wikidata. We're working on addressing this. (
phab:T275251)
Migrating a number of components to vue 3 to keep up with the rest of MediaWiki (
phab:T294465)
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the
Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose
site bans,
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.
Apologies, apparently I did not update the start revision id when using the cv-revdel tool. I have refiled the original copyvio request. Additionally, there is one more (new) instance on the same article by the same editor.
– robertsky (
talk)
00:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your patience. Sorry if I freaked out too much. The only edits I cannot check myself are the ones you just redacted today. They are in my last 100 contributions. Thank you so much for your kindness.
Scorpions13256 (
talk)
20:42, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. I'm calmer now. If you look in my last 100 contributions, you will see the word "presumptive" come up a lot. You redacted the bottom half of the edits, so I can't see what the source was. If they are the same source as the top ones, they can come back.
Scorpions13256 (
talk)
20:51, 25 November 2021 (UTC)