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.

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

Please cite your source for changing the response to Time of the Doctor from positive to mixed. I can find no reliable siurce supporting this claim Shaolindoctorwho ( talk) 14:14, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

The only source right now giving any kind of overview is IMDB, and there the reaction is 8.2 positive. A rundown of all the major reviews is in line with this assessment. Rotten Tomates has it at 100 percent fresh but given the small number of reviews there, it is far too early to use it as a source. You cannot use your own opinion about the show or its reaction for this. This isn't a gut reaction kind of assesment. You must cite. You must abide by wikipedia policy and cite. I request that other editors be brought in to this matter. Clearly the article has become the focus of fan feuds. Shaolindoctorwho ( talk) 14:23, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi! I've responded over at Talk:The Time of the Doctor. - Bilby ( talk) 14:51, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

I like the way you explained this to the IP. I guess I was just too lazy to do something about it myself - putting in effort to protect paid editors may be correct and of course policy is against outing but of course they damage Wikipedia and waste an inordinate amount of good editors time, so I'm afraid I couldn't be bothered. I should trout myself. Dougweller ( talk) 08:54, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

I understand exactly how you feel. :) I spend a lot of time trying to quietly counter some of the problems they produce, but I really wish the community could get some consensus on how to proceed, whatever it may be. - Bilby ( talk) 08:17, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi there, Bilby. I could be wrong, but I don't think our paths have ever crossed on Wikipedia, though I'm looking for help with a few minor suggestions to the C-SPAN article and I know that you've helped User:16912 Rhiannon—with whom I work—with a few COI projects of hers in the past. I'm hoping you might be able to help me as well.

My COI with C-SPAN is very straightforward: I have been a consultant to the network for several years now and have been working this year to improve the C-SPAN article so that I can submit it to WP:FAC. I had done so once, incorporated a good amount of feedback—it seems very close—but eventually time ran out on the first nomination.

Over the past few months, I had been working with a couple of editors to finalize some small changes to the page—but the editor with whom I'd been talking ( User:Ruhrfisch) has drifted away as of late. Since then, I've posted about my two suggestions on the Paid Editor Help page, though it doesn't seem to be very active these days.

If you can help, the request at Paid Editor Help explains everything in more detail—and the key discussion itself is back at Talk:C-SPAN. In short, I'm looking to update the current XM radio channel listing in the article and to clarify one point in the History section. While I don't think these are remotely controversial or POV-ish, I'm also keen on following Jimbo's "bright line" so I won't be the person to make them myself.

Any chance you could take a look at this and, if the changes seem agreeable, update the entry? After that, it's over to FAC. Cheers, WWB Too ( Talk · COI) 02:30, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

This is now  Done. Cheers, WWB Too ( Talk · COI) 14:33, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Freelancer.com may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-02-09/news/31042112_1_indian-users-job-seekers-indian-currency,Indiatimes.com | work=The Times Of India | title=Website for freelance assignments launched in

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 07:15, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

This Month in Education – Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2013 Headlines EduWiki Conference 2013 convenes in Cardiff Notes from Tec de Monterrey-Mexico City Campus "Students Write Wikipedia" in the Czech Republic again Plagiarism study results released More than 50 gather to celebrate third Egypt term Feedback sought on new Welcome to Wikipedia draft Wikimedia Diversity Conference 2013 in Berlin Articles of Interest in other publications To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor team has worked on some feature changes, major infrastructure improvements to make the system more stable, dependable and extensible, some minor toolbar improvements, and fixing bugs.

A new form parsing library for language characters in Parsoid caused the corruption of pages containing diacritics for about an hour two weeks ago. Relatively few pages at the English Wikipedia were affected, but this created immediate problems at some other Wikipedias, sometimes affecting several dozen pages. The development teams for Parsoid and VisualEditor apologize for the serious disruption and thank the people who reported this emergency at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback and on the public IRC channel, #mediawiki-visualeditor.

There have been dozens of changes since the last newsletter. Here are some of the highlights:

• Accidental deletion of infoboxes and other items: You now need to press the Delete or ← Backspace key twice to delete a template, reference or image. The first time, the item becomes selected, and the second time, it is removed. The need to press the delete key twice should make it more obvious what you are doing and help avoid accidental removals of infoboxes and similar ( bug 55336).
• Switch from VisualEditor to the wikitext editor: A new feature lets you make a direct, one-way editing interface change, which will preserve your changes without needing to save the page and re-open it in the wikitext editor ( bug 50687). It is available in a new menu in the action buttons by the Cancel button (where the "Page Settings" button used to be). Note that this new feature is not currently working in Firefox.
• Categories and Languages are also now directly available in that menu. The category suggestions drop-down was appearing in the wrong place rather than below its input box, which is now fixed. An incompatibility between VisualEditor and the deployed Parsoid service that prevented editing categories and language links was fixed.
• File:, Help: and Category: namespaces: VisualEditor was enabled for these namespaces the on all wikis ( bug 55968), the Portal: and Viquiprojecte: namespaces on the Catalan Wikipedia ( bug 56000), and the Portal: and Book: namespaces on the English Wikipedia ( bug 56001).
• Media item resizing: We improved how files are viewed in a few ways. First, inline media items can now be resized in the same way that has been possible with block ones (like thumbnails) before. When resizing a media item, you can see a live preview of how it will look as you drag it ( bug 54298). While you are dragging an image to resize it, we now show a label with the current dimensions ( bug 54297). Once you have resized it, we fetch a new, higher resolution image for the media item if necessary ( bug 55697). Manual setting of media item sizes in their dialog is nearly complete and should be available next week. If you hold down the ⇧ Shift key whilst resizing an image, it will now snap to a 10 pixel grid instead of the normal free-hand sizing. The media item resize label now is centered while resizing regardless of which tool you use to resize it.
• Undo and redo: A number of improvements were made to the transactions system which make undoing and redoing more reliable during real-time collaboration ( bug 53224).
• Save dialogue: The save page was re-written to use the same code as all other dialogs ( bug 48566), and in the process fixed a number of issues. The save dialog is re-accessible if it loses focus ( bug 50722), or if you review a null edit ( bug 53313); its checkboxes for minor edit, watch the page, and flagged revisions options now layout much more cleanly ( bug 52175), and the tab order of the buttons is now closer to what users will expect ( bug 51918). There was a bug in the save dialog that caused it to crash if there was an error in loading the page from Parsoid, which is now fixed.
• Links to other articles or pages sometimes sent people to invalid pages. VisualEditor now keeps track of the context in which you loaded the page, which lets us fix up links in document to point to the correct place regardless of what entry point you launched the editor from—so the content of pages loaded through /wiki/Foobar?veaction=edit and /?title=Foobar&veaction=edit both now have text links that work if triggered ( bug 48915).
• Toolbar links: A bug that caused the toolbar's menus to get shorter or even blank when scrolled down the page in Firefox is now fixed ( bug 55343).
• Numbered external links: VisualEditor now supports Parsoid's changed representation of numbered external links ( bug 53505).
• Removed empty templates: We also fixed an issue that meant that completely empty templates became impossible to interact with inside VisualEditor, as they didn't show up ( bug 55810).
• Mathematics formulae: If you would like to try the experimental LaTeX mathematics tool in VisualEditor, you will need to opt-in to Beta Features. This is currently available on Meta-wiki, Wikimedia Commons, and Mediawiki.org. It will be available on all other Wikimedia sites on 21 November.
• Browser testing support: If you are interested in technical details, the browser tests were expanded to cover some basic cursor operations, which uncovered an issue in our testing framework that doesn't work with cursoring in Firefox; the Chrome tests continue to fail due to a bug with the welcome message for that part of the testing framework.
• Load time: VisualEditor now uses content language when fetching Wikipedia:TemplateData information, so reducing bandwidth use, and users on multi-language or multi-script wikis now get TemplateData hinting for templates as they would expect ( bug 50888).
• Reuse of VisualEditor: Work on spinning out the user experience (UX) framework from VisualEditor into oojs-ui, which lets other teams at Wikimedia (like Flow) and gadget authors re-use VisualEditor UX components, is now complete and is being moved to a shared code repository.
• Support for private wikis: If you maintain a private wiki at home or at work, VisualEditor now supports editing of private wikis, by forwarding the Cookie: HTTP header to Parsoid ($wgVisualEditorParsoidForwardCookies set to true) ( bug 44483). (Most private wikis will also need to install Parsoid and node.js, as VisualEditor requires them.)

Looking ahead:

• VisualEditor will be released to some of the smaller Wikipedias on 02 December 2013. If you are active at one or more smaller Wikipedias where VisualEditor is not yet generally available, please see the list at VisualEditor/Rollouts.
• Public office hours on IRC to discuss VisualEditor with Product Manager James Forrester will be held on Monday, 2 December, at 1900 UTC and on Tuesday, 3 December, at 0100 UTC. Bring your questions. Logs will be posted on Meta after each office hour completes.
• In terms of feature improvements, one of the major infrastructure projects affects how inserting characters works, both using your computer's built-in Unicode input systems and through a planned character inserter tool for VisualEditor. The forthcoming rich copying and pasting feature was extended and greater testing is currently being done. Work continues to support the improved reference dialog to quickly add citations based on local templates.

If you have questions or suggestions for future improvements, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting a note at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) 22:14, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Hey Bilby, I have a question about the Linode page. The page says "The neutrality of this article is disputed." I agree, without any context it reads non-neutral. Looking at the editing history, it looks like the removed History and other sections contexualized and balanced the page. I saw that you worked on the page in September and I thought I'd ask for your help and input. Reka olner ( talk) 20:21, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

There were problems with those section, mostly to do with some sourcing issues, but I agree that they are much needed in order to help with balance. I've added a little back, and I'll keep looking for sources to expand it. - Bilby ( talk) 06:18, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Linode, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages SSL and Load balancing ( check to confirm |  fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:07, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for attending to that. I was just wondering if it was possible to remove hate messages from articles of living people. Amandajm ( talk) 13:20, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

The idiot has returned, twice. Amandajm ( talk) 13:40, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! I've protected the page for a short while, and blocked the IP. - Bilby ( talk) 13:52, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

This Month in Education – Volume 2, Issue 12, December 2013 Headlines International Seminar Wikipedia and University: Research and Teaching Experiences Final report on "Silberwissen" available in English Planning the future of course pages Day of the Dead photo contest winners Articles of Interest in other publications To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Hey, you deleted my addition "Wikipedia movement" to this article and commented "will rewrite", you forgotten this perhaps or just too busy? Nosepea68 ( talk) 03:50, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

I realised that it was already covered in the previous paragraph. - Bilby ( talk) 05:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor team has worked on some toolbar improvements, fixing bugs, and improving support for Indic languages as well as other languages with complex characters. The current focus is on improving the reference dialog and expanding the new character inserter tool.

There have been dozens of changes since the last newsletter. Here are some of the highlights:

• Rich copying and pasting is now available. If you copy text from another website, then character formatting and some other HTML attributes are preserved. This means, for example, that if you copy a pre-formatted suggested citation from a source like this, then VisualEditor will preserve the formatting of the title in the citation. Keep in mind that copying the formatting may include formatting that you don't want (like section headings). If you want to paste plain, unformatted text onto a page, then use Control+⇧ Shift+V or ⌘ Command+⇧ Shift+V (Mac).
• Auto-numbered external links like [1] can now be edited just like any other link. However, they cannot be created in VisualEditor easily.
• Several changes to the toolbar and dialogs have been made, and more are on the way. The toolbar has been simplified with a new drop-down text styles menu and an "insert" menu. Your feedback on the toolbar is wanted here. The transclusion/template dialog has been simplified. If you have enabled mathematical formula editing, then the menu item is now called the formula editor instead of LaTeX.
• There is a new character inserter, which you can find in the new "insert" menu, with a capital Omega ("Ω"). It's a very basic set of characters. Your feedback on the character inserter is wanted here.
• Saving the page should seem faster by several seconds now.
• It is now possible to access VisualEditor by manually editing the URL, even if you are not logged in or have not opted in to VisualEditor normally.  To do so, append ?veaction=edit to the end of the page name.  For example, change /info/en/?search=Special:Random to /info/en/?search=Special:Random?veaction=edit to open a random page in VisualEditor.  This is intended to support bug testing across multiple browsers, without requiring editors to login repeatedly.

Looking ahead: The transclusion dialog will see further changes in the coming weeks, with a simple mode for single templates and an advanced mode for more complex transclusions. The new character formatting menu on the toolbar will get an arrow to show that it is a drop-down menu. The reference dialog will be improved, and the Reference item will become a button in the main toolbar, rather than an item in the Insert menu.

If you have questions or suggestions for future improvements, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting a note at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) ( talk) 20:42, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

There is obviously no clear and/or deliberate CV going on here, either intentional or otherwise and I'm getting sick and tired of your copy edits without raising the matter on my talk page. If you have a problem with my edits on these grounds you must discuss -- Orestes1984 ( talk) 11:38, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

You were right and I was wrong, my abrasive behaviour lately is uncalled for -- Orestes1984 ( talk) 14:24, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Xmas!

Best wishes for a great Christmas, and for a happy, healthy and prosperous 2014! Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:06, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :)

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Racepacket is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI.

Happy New Year! MER-C 09:51, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice regarding my post in the anxiety article I will get that dons when I get back home for New Years. I read on your user page that you like anime, if you want to, I sometimes draw anime so you could go to www.deviantart.com and then in the serch bar look up Dark Whispers123 then click on Dark Whispers123 to get to my profile. Stormy Nights ( talk) 17:12, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Did it actually get applied? Timeshift ( talk) 00:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

It did, but as a number of editors in the past have been against protecting their talk pages, I just went for something short-term until I heard from you. It worked at the time, though. After the IP showed up again, someone else has protected your page for longer before I could wander over. :) - Bilby ( talk) 14:46, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

First of all, I wrote the Clark A. Peterson article before I ever realized he was a judge.

Then just today, I realized that Rob Bell (Virginia politician) was the same Rob Bell who worked for Iron Crown Enterprises.

John Nephew of Atlas Games was also a city councilman in Minnesota - turning the redirect into an article is on my to-do list. BOZ ( talk) 03:48, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

I reverted your revert at Wiki-PR editing of Wikipedia. It may be the same old story, but it's the recent 2014 version, after all the previous nonsense. It's also written by the New York Times, without any wishy-washy wikilawyering language. Smallbones_{( smalltalk)} 05:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

It is also written by a columnist calling for an army of sockpuppets to improve her article, only says stuff that is already in the article, and has nothing to do with "Wikipedia and Wikimedia reaction". And then, of course, you are highlighting that comment, without including any of Wiki-PRs response. I don't see any value in the quote. - Bilby ( talk) 05:16, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Hey. Well, you did not have to bring the page back. It is wrong. The correct title should be Management Information Systems. with an "s" in the end! That page should not even exist! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amjad z4 ( talk • contribs) 06:16, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Alright. Lets start a discussion. But there really should be a page on the field too. I wonder why there isn't! Some info can be taken from this page too: /info/en/?search=Master_of_Science_in_Information_Systems

Could you weigh in on an editorial dispute between Mrm7171 and me on how to edit the health psychology entry? Thank you Iss246 ( talk) 15:36, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

Added the reference from iss246 and whatamidoing that Occupational health psych is a specialization of health psychology. 'Their supposed' reliable source, not mine is attached. Are they wrong? I'm confused Probably best to discuss rather than blindly revert their reliable source. I Have no idea what OHP is actually? Mrm7171 ( talk) 11:32, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi,

I and User:Keilana are OAs for a course project in Molecular Biology, taught at John Hopkins University for the upcoming Spring, 2014 semester. We ran the same course last semester, and you can check out the course page. I will be putting together the new course pages (two, one each for two sections) for the upcoming semester in the next couple of days.

We are wondering if you would be willing to help with this. Mostly, it involves hand-holding and answering questions for students who are new to Wikipedia. However, we also hope that you would be able to help review articles as they become mature, during the review cycles in units 9, 11, and 13. Here is an example review by Keilana.

Depending on how many other OAs we get, we'd be asking for commitment of between two - four reviews for each of those three cycles, and each might take about an hour.

Would you be able to help with this? If so, could you please let us know as soon as possible? Thanks! Klortho ( talk) 03:52, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

This Month in Education – Volume 3, Issue 1, January 2014 Headlines Wikimedia Deutschland starts alliance for Open Educational Resources (OER); Berlin discusses introduction of OER in schools Next EduWiki conference slated for Serbia Presentation on Wikipedia at the 8th Congress of Innovation and Educational Technology in Monterrey, Mexico Presentation on Wikipedia at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne Articles of Interest in other publications To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor team has worked mostly minor features and fixing bugs. A few significant bugs include working around a bug in CSSJanus that was wrongly flipping images used in some templates in right-to-left (RTL) environments ( bug 50910) a major bug that meant inserting any template or other transclusion failed ( bug 59002), a major but quickly resolved problem due to an unannounced change in MediaWiki core, which caused VisualEditor to crash on trying to save ( bug 59867). This last bugs did not appear on any Wikipedia. Additionally, significant work has been done in the background to make VisualEditor work as an independent editing system.

As of today, VisualEditor is now available as an opt-out feature to all users at 149 active Wikipedias.

• The character inserter tool in the "Insert" menu has a very basic set of characters. The character inserter is especially important for languages that use Latin and Cyrillic alphabets with unusual characters or frequent diacritics. Your feedback on the character inserter is requested. In addition to feedback from any interested editor, the developers would particularly like to hear from anyone who speaks any of the 50+ languages listed under Phase 5 at mw:VisualEditor/Rollouts, including Breton, Mongolian, Icelandic, Welsh, Afrikaans, Macedonian, and Azerbaijani.
• meta:Office hours on IRC have been heavily attended recently. The next one will be held this coming Wednesday, 22 January at  23:00 UTC.
• You can now edit some of the page settings in the "options" dialog – __NOTOC__ and __FORCETOC__ as selection (forced on, forced off, or default setting; bugs 56866 and 56867) and __NOEDITSECTION__ as a checkbox ( bug 57166).
• The automated browser tests were adjusted to speed them up and bind more correctly to list items in lists, and updated to a newer version of their ruby dependencies. You can monitor the automated browser tests' results (triggered every twelve hours) live on the server.
• Wikipedia:VisualEditor/User guide was updated recently to show some new and upcoming features.

Looking ahead: The character formatting menu on the toolbar will get a drop-down indicator next Thursday. The reference and media items will be the first two listed in the Insert menu. The help menu will get a page listing the keyboard shortcuts. Looking further out, image handling will be improved, including support for alignment (left, right, and center) and better control over image size (including default and upright sizes). The developers are also working on support for editing redirects and image galleries.

Subscriptions to this newsletter are managed at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Newsletter. Please add or remove your name to change your subscription settings. If you have questions or suggestions for future improvements, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting a note at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) 20:07, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

I think we have enough OAs now, but thanks very much for your offer to help. Klortho ( talk) 13:51, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! — Unforgettableid ( talk) 23:44, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bilby - as initial clarity, this is not a block I am intending to make, at least at any point before discussions have fully played out (and probably not after,) because blocking a single paidsock isn't a time sensitive issue. I'd been categorically avoiding the idea of conducting any paidsockblock myself given my past involvement with Wiki-PR, but at least one person disagreed that I would be involved given that Wiki-PR has been banned and socking is generally considered an egregiously blockable act anyway, and I'm curious to get your take on it. Out of curiosity: if I blocked User:PetarrPoznic for violating WP:SOCK (which doesn't require ID'ing a master as far as I can tell) with a clearly laid out chain of evidence indicating why there's an overwhelming probability that that account is in violation of WP:SOCK, would you consider my block as in violation of WP:INVOLVED? (Whether you consider it a good or bad block is a separate question, since making a block another admin considers incorrect and making a block another admin considers in violation of WP:INVOLVED are quite different things.) Best, Kevin Gorman ( talk) 23:56, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Sorry for being away - I picked up a bit of a bug. :) I think there's a good case for blocking PetarrPoznic under the duck test - it is a bit secondary, but I was planning to dig a bit more anyway. I think Rybec is correct that there is good evidence pointing to some of the recently listed accounts. WP:Involved has always been a bit complex here - we haven't necessarily been considered involved if our actions were in admin actions, without any other interaction, especially in long-term sock cases. But I seem to recall a couple of situations where an admin was deemed involved because of the long-term situation. I'll see if I can remember when they came up.

On related issues, Morning277 has been active recently, so I'll be keeping an eye out for him. - Bilby ( talk) 23:19, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Trident13. I gather you might not be aware, so to clarify the current situation, WikiExperts.us has been community banned from Wikipedia. It is an unusual case, as the same model was applied as that given to Wiki-PR, whereby the ban extends to all related organisations, people connected with WikiExperts, and employees. - Bilby ( talk) 02:31, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the message - I am not surprised! He approached me re doing some work for him, asked me to sign an NDA, then - nowt! Used some of my day-job skills then to do some background research, and was resultantly happy that the "opportunity" didn't go any further. I didn't see any of the organisations or subjects that he had as clients, but some of the projects that he was offering services to wouldn't have passed WP:NOTAB with a gale force wind behind them. Rgds, -- Trident13 ( talk) 10:45, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I could use your help on the industrial/organizational psychology talk page. Iss246 ( talk) 02:43, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor team has worked on some small changes to the user interface, such as moving the reference item to the top of the Insert menu, as well as some minor features and fixing bugs, especially for rich copying and pasting of references.

The biggest change was the addition of more features to the image dialog, including the ability to set alignment (left, right, center), framing options (thumbnail, frame, frameless, and none), adding alt text, and defining the size manually. There is still some work to be done here, including a quick way to set the default size.

• The main priority is redesigning the reference dialog, with the goal of providing autofill features for ISBNs and URLs and streamlining the process. Current concept drawings are available at mw:VisualEditor/Design/Reference Dialog. Please share your ideas about making referencing quick and easy with the designers.
• A few bugs in the existing reference dialog were fixed. The toolbar was simplified to remove galleries and lists from the reference dialog. When you re-use references, it now correctly displays the references again, rather than just the number and name. If you paste content into a dialog that can't fit there (e.g. ==section headings== in references), it now strips out the inappropriate HTML.
• You can now edit image galleries inside VisualEditor. At this time, the gallery tool is a very limited option that gives you access to the wikitext. It will see significant improvements at a later date.
• The character inserter tool in the "Insert" menu is being redesigned. Your feedback on the special character inserter is still wanted, especially if you depend on Wikipedia's character inserters for your normal editing rather than using the ones built into your computer.
• You can now see a help page about keyboard shortcuts in the page menu (three bars next to the Cancel button) ( T54844).
• If you edit categories, your changes will now display correctly after saving the page ( T50560).
• Saving the page should be faster now ( T61660).
• Any community can ask to test a new tool to edit TemplateData by leaving a note at T53734.

Looking ahead: The link tool will tell you when you're linking to a disambiguation or redirect page. The warning about wikitext will hide itself after you remove the wikitext markup in that paragraph. Support for creating and editing redirects is in the pipeline. Looking further out, image handling will be improved, including default and upright sizes. The developers are also working on support for viewing and editing hidden HTML comments, some behavioral magic words like DISPLAYTITLE, and in-line language setting (dir="rtl").

If you have questions or suggestions for future improvements, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting a note at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) 04:21, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Cheers! — Unforgettableid ( talk) 00:27, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Micky m salesman no 2. He's back. Ish dar ian 23:48, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. :) I've blocked, and protected the page. - Bilby ( talk) 23:51, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Well, he's back on the talk page now. Ish dar ian 23:52, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. That's now protected too. - Bilby ( talk) 23:54, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Lionhead99 is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI.

It's more fun to count the ones going down than the ones coming in. :) -- Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:10, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor team has mostly worked on changes to the template and image dialogs.

The biggest change in the last few weeks was the redesign of the template dialog. The template dialog now opens in a simplified mode that lists parameters and their descriptions. (The complex multi-item transclusion mode can be reached by clicking on "Show options" from inside the simplified template dialog.) Template parameters now have a bigger, auto-sizing input box for easier editing.  With today's update, searching for template parameters will become case-insensitive, and required template parameters will display an asterisk (*) next to their edit boxes. In addition to making it quicker and easier to see everything when you edit typical templates, this work was necessary to prepare for the forthcoming simplified citation dialog. The main priority in the coming weeks is building this new citation dialog, with the ultimate goal of providing autofill features for ISBNs, URLs, DOIs and other quick-fills. This will add a new button on the toolbar, with the citation templates available picked by each wiki's community. Concept drawings can be seen at mw:VisualEditor/Design/Reference Dialog. Please share your ideas about making referencing quick and easy with the designers.

• The link tool now tells you when you're linking to a disambiguation or redirect page. Pages that exist, but are not indexed by the search engine, are treated like non-existent pages ( T56361).
• Wikitext warnings will now hide when you remove wikitext from the paragraph you are editing.
• The character inserter tool in the "Insert" menu has been slightly redesigned, to introduce larger buttons. Your suggestions for more significant changes to the special character inserter are still wanted.
• The page options menu (three bars, next to the Cancel button) has expanded. You can create and edit redirect pages, set page options like __STATICREDIRECT__, __[NO]INDEX__ and __[NO]NEWEDITSECTION__, and more.  New keyboard shortcuts are listed there, and include undoing the last action, clearing formatting, and showing the shortcut help window. If you switch from VisualEditor to wikitext editing, your edit will now be tagged.
• It is easier to edit images. There are more options and they are explained better. If you add new images to pages, they will also be default size.  You can now set image sizes to the default, if another size was previously specified. Full support for upright sizing systems, which more readily adapt image sizes to the reader's screen size, is planned.
• VisualEditor adds fake blank lines so you can put your cursor there. These "slugs" are now smaller than normal blank lines, and are animated to be different from actual blank lines.
• You can use the Ctrl+Alt+S or ⌘ Command+⌥ Option+S shortcuts to open the save window, and you can preview your edit summary when checking your changes in the save window.
• After community requests, VisualEditor has been deployed to the Interlingual Occidental Wikipedia, the Portuguese Wikibooks, and the French Wikiversity.
• Any community can ask for custom icons for their language in the character formatting menu (bold, italic, etc.) by making a request on Bugzilla or by contacting Product Manager James Forrester.

The developers apologize for a regression bug with the deployment on 6 March 2014, which caused the incorrect removal of |upright size definitions on a handful of pages on the English Wikipedia, among others. The root cause was fixed, and the broken pages were fixed soon after.

Looking ahead:  Several template dialogs will become more compact. Looking further out, the developers are also working on support for viewing and editing hidden HTML comments. You will be able to see the Table of Contents change live as you edit the page, rather than it being hidden. In-line language setting (dir="rtl") may be offered to a few Wikipedias soon.

If you have questions or suggestions for future improvements, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting a note at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback or by joining the office hours on 19 April 2014 at 2000 UTC. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:44, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Hey! I'm just wondering when you took this photo if it was the only one you took of him or if there are others you took that you may have not uploaded? Timeshift ( talk) 01:21, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

There might be some others, but that was before I picked up the fast long lens, so I don't know how well they worked, as I was still using the f4. I'll see if I can dig them up. - Bilby ( talk) 00:09, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Timeshift ( talk) 00:14, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Please see the further RfC here. -- John ( talk) 18:59, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bilby. Given your involvement in the occupational health psychology article over time, can you comment, on talk, as to a couple of clear points I've left there. Just want a civil resolution and to bring some much needed NPOV to that very biased article. Was not sure why you were so keen to get rid of the reference to the scientific committee at the University of South Australia conference, but anyway have compromised on that too. Mrm7171 ( talk) 03:32, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

FYI. I had enough of the attacks and accusations today [2]

The first set of proposals didn't seem contentious, only the second section. I'm not the author of the article nor of the hook and it was passed by two separate users; it should have been added several weeks ago. WP:DYKNN doesn't even discourage adding a hook in my case, though it mentions other cases. Of course, if you want to add it yourself better so. -- Nemo 13:10, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bilby, thanks for removing all the copyright vio text from System for Award Management. I worked on the US Federal Contractor Registration article a couple times before it was merged and I still have a couple decent sources with small amounts of information on the company. I'd like to add some of them to the article, probably near the bottom where it talks about registration. I just wanted to give you a heads-up so that when you see the edits, you don't think someone is trying to add back the same info that you removed. HtownCat ( talk) 22:13, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

As you are one of the editors who have reverted him, this is a courtesy advisory that I have reported 124.171.36.210 at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:124.171.36.210 reported by User:AussieLegend (Result: ) about his edt-warring at Talk:Hey Dad..!. -- AussieLegend ( ✉) 08:44, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

FYI, I filed another complaint [3]. Psyc12 ( talk) 12:25, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

This Month in Education – Volume 3, Issue 4, April 2014 Headlines Consolidation of Portals and newsletter for the Global Education Program Remembering Adrianne Wadewitz Remembering Cynthia Ashley-Nelson Engineering students in Panama work on Spanish Wikipedia Jisc/ Wikimedia UK partnership Wikimedia Sverige: New resource for Swedish teachers on Wikiversity Wikimedia Deutschland: Summary of activities in March 2014 Happenings at Tec de Monterrey, Mexico City Campus Educational programming continues on Wikinews Welcome, Anna Koval! Exploratory research started for setting up a Wikipedia Education program in the Netherlands LiAnna Davis joins Wiki Ed as head of communications and external relations To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Anna Koval (WMF) ( talk) 21:44, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

The concern you expressed here is fully justified. I am an editor at nl.wiki and have been involved in disputes with bmwz3hm there. I have no connection to either party and my own interest is the encyclopedia. Nevertheless I find myself (to my dismay) confronted with someone who is determined to win an edit war. I tried to open up a dispute on the talk page, but to no avail. Mrs. Mees is quite wellknown in the Netherlands, but mainly as an opinion writer with provocative feminist views. She is often called a "power feminist", someone who promotes third-wave-feminism. As a scientist or a lawyer she is up till now not particularly notable. The version in which is said that all charges in the court case are set for dismissal (without mentioning the conditions forced upon Mees, but not failing to mention that it is alleged that Buiter in spite of the accusations contacted Mees) is certainly POV in favour of Mees. On the Dutch Wikipedia she made clear that she wants to be notable as a scientist and a lawyer to contradict and to counteract Buiters low opinion of her capacities. Could you give me advice what would be the next thing to do. I have stopped edit warring, so the current article is the preferred version of bmwz3hm. Thanks in advance, Theobald Tiger ( talk) 08:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

On my talk page I already received a warning not to disclose real-life identities again. OK, but how could anyone possibly reveal self-promotion if disclosing identities in obvious cases is strictly forbidden? Theobald Tiger ( talk) 20:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

It can be a problem. The English Wikipedia's approach has been to regard privacy as more important than conflict of interest editing. Accordingly, if we can only show that someone has a COI by publicly revealing their identity, we have to choose not to prove the COI. When you get down to it, the COI guideline is just a guideline, not policy, so privacy issues trump it every time.

That said, we don't need to publicly prove the nature of the COI. In this case, the editor hasn't denied having one, and the complete focus on only two articles, along with other issues, makes it clear that some sort of conflict of interest exists. It doesn't really matter what the nature of it is - we know that there is a concern, and we can act on that without knowing more. In many cases, like this, that is enough - the conflict of interest is clear. - Bilby ( talk) 14:21, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your clear answer. It helped me to understand en.wiki. I will act accordingly. Theobald Tiger ( talk) 14:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

It was decided the meeting should be written up, and that this should be a collaborative exercise. I have "started the ball rolling" at Wikipedia:Meetup/Adelaide/Meetup 8#Meeting summary Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 15:25, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Thankyou. I'll try to build on that. - Bilby ( talk) 14:37, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

May meetup

Can we get the date sorted a.s.a.p. please? Then we can start "recruiting" attendees ... Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 11:31, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I'm happy to start ... errrrr ... (posting to / spamming / choose-your-expression) user talk pages, provided we can decide what to post ... Pdfpdf ( talk) 11:31, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Dear Bilby, I would like to thank you for your patience and constructive approach. You contacted me this January to express your concern about some of my edits (I mean these your messages about conflict of interest). I assured you that there was no reason for concern, but I was wrong. With all my desire to be neutral and follow the principles of Wikipedia, I could not create new articles with any personal or professionally connection so as not to draw criticism from other editors. My work has become unpleasant, I was discouraged from editing. So I really appreciate your help (I mean this comment and some others). I have reconsidered my attitude to this situation and decided to follow your initial advice. Now I don't add any new articles with possible conflict of interest directly. I have tried to use the "Articles for creation" section and would be very grateful if you can just have a look at it and express your opinion about the quality of my submission or even accept it, if you think that it complies with the rules ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Serguei_Netessine). Anyway, thank you for everything. I hope your communication with me wasn't in vain. — Alexandra Goncharik ^-sms- 15:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Template:Infobox big thing has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor team has mostly worked on performance improvements, image settings, and preparation for a simplified citation template tool in its own menu.

• In an oft-requested improvement, VisualEditor now displays red links ( links to non-existent pages) in the proper color. Links to sister projects and external URLs are still the same blue as local links.
• You can now open templates by double-clicking them or by selecting them and pressing  Return.  This also works for references, images, galleries, mathematical equations, and other "nodes".
• VisualEditor has been disabled for pages that were created as translations of other pages using the Translate extension (common at Meta and MediaWiki.org). If a page has been marked for translation, you will see a warning if you try to edit it using VisualEditor.
• When you try to edit protected pages with VisualEditor, the full protection notice and most recent log entry are displayed. Blocked users see the standard message for blocked users.
• The developers fixed a bug that caused links on sub-pages to point to the wrong location.
• The size-changing controls in the advanced settings section of the media or image dialog were simplified further. VisualEditor's media dialog supports more image display styles, like borderless images.
• If there is not enough space on your screen to display all of the tabs (for instance, if your browser window is too narrow), the second edit tab will now fold into the drop-down menu (where the "Move" item is currently housed). On the English Wikipedia, this moves the "Edit beta" tab into the menu; on most projects, it moves the "Edit source" tab. This is only enabled in the default Vector skin, not for Monobook users. See this image for an example showing the "Edit source" and "View history" tabs after they moved into the drop-down menu.
• After community requests, VisualEditor has been deployed as an opt-in feature at Meta and on the French Wikinews.

Looking ahead:  A new, locally controlled menu of citation templates will put citations immediately in front of users. You will soon be able to see the Table of Contents while editing. Support for upright image sizes (preferred for accessibility) is being developed. In-line language setting (dir="rtl") will be offered as a Beta Feature soon. Looking further out, the developers are also working on support for viewing and editing hidden HTML comments. It will be possible to upload images to Commons from inside VisualEditor.

If you have questions or suggestions for future improvements, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting a note at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback or by joining the office hours on Monday, 19 May 2014 at 18:00 UTC. If you'd like to get this on your own page, subscribe at Wikipedia:VisualEditor#Newsletter for English Wikipedia only or at meta:VisualEditor/Newsletter for any project. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) ( talk) 20:23, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Further to our last face-to-face discussion ...
Whose turn is it this time? Is it just you and me, or are there others prepared to, yet again, pseudo-apologise for Trans-Adelaide's incompetent communication skills? Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:03, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

If it goes as planned, it is due to reopen the end of this week. So I'm inclined to sit back and see if that happens. Although I'll be surprised if they finally manage to hit a deadline. - Bilby ( talk) 05:07, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

...that this was an accident on your part. I'm literally 30 seconds from blocking that editor, and it's time to appeal to their sense of ethics the panda ₯’ 23:55, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately no, it wasn't an accident. I fully understand what you are trying to do, but the problem is that you've gotten too close to outing. It is an understandable mistake, especially given the circumstances, but I'm going to have to risk erring on the side of caution. - Bilby ( talk) 02:07, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, when they identified themselves on Commons, it's hardly Outing the panda ₯’ 08:53, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

[4] Probably not a good idea to implement any of those suggested edits. It would be block evasion and per WP:DENY it would be perfectly legitimate to remove them. I would suggest it is probably better to allow the article to develop naturally without being engineered by a serial sockpuppeteer. Until that editor comes to realise that wikipedia is a co-operative enterprise built on consensus I doubt they can edit constructively. W C M _email 12:09, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

It isn't a problem to consider suggestions made by a blocked (not banned) editor - it is, however, a problem to blindly implement them. I am willing to consider them, especially as this is a BLP, and therefore we need to take extra care that we consider all viewpoints in order to make it neutral and factual. - Bilby ( talk) 12:14, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

You should never encourage serial sockpuppeteers to continue their disruption, their condescension towards others, their image building activities, their rudeness. Theobald Tiger ( talk) 12:34, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Indeed, I fully agree. However, if it is true that the editor concerned is representing Heleen Mees, then I will certainly listen to what they have to say, so long as they are not using socks or breaking policies to do so. I feel that we are obligated to listen, although we then need to decide if what they are saying is something that we can or should act on. - Bilby ( talk) 12:38, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Except they are using socks, you actually replied to one of the socks. The only reason for talk page access at the moment is for an unblock request, it isn't a vehicle for block evasion by proxy editing. And at this time you're proxy editing on her behalf. W C M _email 12:50, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

No, proxy editing would be acting on behalf of the blocked editor. I will not act on their behalf, and I am unwilling to ever edit based on someone else's instructions. I am willing to consider issues that they raise, as I would with any editor where a BLP is concerned. - Bilby ( talk) 12:53, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Could you address the point about continuing to encourage sock puppetry, talk page access was denied as they were using it to ask for proxy editing. They immediately switch to another sock and you continue where you left of. Surely you can see that is not a sensible thing to do and is encouraging them to continue socking. It certainly won't encourage them to edit collaboratively. W C M _email 13:00, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

I specifically said that they should not use alternative accounts to evade restrictions. I have no wish to encourage the use of socks. - Bilby ( talk) 13:04, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Heleen Mees lead

Bilby, about your most recent edit to Heleen Mees:

Currently, the Heleen Mees article says "While completing her research, she worked as an Adjunct Assistant Professor at Tilburg University.[14] From September 2012 until July 2013, Mees was employed as an Adjunct Associate Professor of Public Administration at New York University's Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service.[15]"

You added to the lead: "Mees completed a doctorate in 2012, and subsequently worked for a time at Tilburg University and New York University's Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service."

It is my understanding that she worked at Tilburg University while completing her doctoral research, not after ("subsequently"). -- TheCockroach ( talk) 03:17, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. :) I'm not sure how I managed to forget that. - Bilby ( talk) 03:27, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bilby. I've just placed a note at Talk:Mark Versallion pointing out that the post signed by "Colin Fine" was actually posted by User:Merv96. Do you think there's a conduct issue here? Regards, -- Stfg ( talk) 19:13, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about that. It seems to be a newbie doing something ill-advised, but innocently. -- Stfg ( talk) 19:36, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

This Month in Education – Volume 3, Issue 5, May 2014 Headlines Wiki Camp 2014 at Vanadzor EduWiki Conference in Belgrade 2014 Participation of "Servicio Social" students in Wikipedia grows at Tec de Monterrey Wikimedia Deutschland: Summary of activities in April 2014 Wikimedia Sverige: Meeting the educators Egyptian students and professors celebrate last term's accomplishments Articles of interest in other publications To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:08, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor team has mostly worked on the new citation tool, improving performance, reducing technical debt, and other infrastructure needs.

The biggest change in the last few weeks is the new citation template menu, labeled "⧼visualeditor-toolbar-cite-label⧽". The new citation menu offers a locally configurable list of citation templates on the main toolbar. It adds or opens references using the simplified template dialog that was deployed last month. This tool is in addition to the "⧼visualeditor-dialogbutton-reference-tooltip⧽" item in the "Insert" menu, and it is not displayed unless it has been configured for that wiki. To enable this tool on your wiki, see the instructions at VisualEditor/Citation tool.

Eventually, the VisualEditor team plans to add autofill features for these citations. When this long-awaited feature is created, you could add an ISBN, URL, DOI or other identifier to the citation tool, and VisualEditor would automatically fill in as much information for that source as possible. The concept drawings can be seen at mw:VisualEditor/Design/Reference Dialog, and your ideas about making referencing quick and easy are still wanted.

• There is a new Beta Feature for setting content language and direction.  This allows editors who have opted in to use the "Language" tool in the "Insert" menu to add HTML span tags that label text with the language and as being left-to-right (LTR) or right-to-left (RTL), like this:  <span lang="en" dir="ltr">English</span>. This tool is most useful for pages whose text combines multiple languages with different directions, common on Right-to-Left wikis.
• The tool for editing mathematics formulae in VisualEditor has been slightly updated and is now available to all users, as the "⧼math-visualeditor-mwmathinspector-title⧽" item in the "Insert" menu. It uses LaTeX like in the wikitext editor.
• The layout of template dialogs has been changed, putting the label above the field.  Parameters are now called "fields", to avoid a technical term that many editors are unfamiliar with.
• TemplateData has been expanded:  You can now add "suggested" parameters in TemplateData, and VisualEditor will display them in the template dialogs like required ones.  "Suggested" is recommended for parameters that are commonly used, but not actually required to make the template work.  There is also a new type for TemplateData parameters: wiki-file-name, for file names.  The template tool can now tell you if a parameter is marked as being obsolete.
• Some templates that previously displayed strangely due to absolute CSS positioning hacks should now display correctly.
• Several messages have changed: The notices shown when you save a page have been merged into those used in the wikitext editor, for consistency.  The message shown when you "⧼visualeditor-toolbar-cancel⧽" out of an edit is clearer. The beta dialog notice, which is shown the first time you open VisualEditor, will be hidden for logged-in users via a user preference rather than a cookie.  As a result of this change, the beta notice will show up one last time for all logged-in users on their next VisualEditor use after Thursday's upgrade.
• Adding a category that is a redirect to another category prompts you to add the target category instead of the redirect.
• In the "Images and media" dialog, it is no longer possible to set a redundant border for thumbnail and framed images.
• There is a new Template Documentation Editor for TemplateData.  You can test it by editing a documentation subpage (not a template page) at Mediawiki.org: edit mw:Template:Sandbox/doc, and then click "Manage template documentation" above the wikitext edit box.  If your community would like to use this TemplateData editor at your project, please contact product manager James Forrester or file an enhancement request in Bugzilla.
• There have been multiple small changes to the appearance:  External links are shown in the same light blue color as in MediaWiki.  This is a lighter shade of blue than the internal links.  The styling of the "Style text" (character formatting) drop-down menu has been synchronized with the recent font changes to the Vector skin.  VisualEditor dialogs, such as the "⧼visualeditor-toolbar-savedialog⧽" dialog, now use a "loading" animation of moving lines, rather than animated GIF images.  Other changes were made to the appearance upon opening a page in VisualEditor which should make the transition between reading and editing be smoother.
• The developers merged in many minor fixes and improvements to MediaWiki interface integration (e.g., edit notices), and made VisualEditor handle Education Program pages better.
• At the request of the community, VisualEditor has been deployed to Commons as an opt-in. It is currently available by default for 161 Wikipedia language editions and by opt-in through Beta Features at all others, as well as on several non-Wikipedia sites.

Looking ahead:  The toolbar from the PageTriage extension will no longer be visible inside VisualEditor. More buttons and icons will be accessible from the keyboard.  The "Keyboard shortcuts" link will be moved out of the "Page options" menu, into the "Help" menu. Support for upright image sizes (preferred for accessibility) and inline images is being developed. You will be able to see the Table of Contents while editing. Looking further out, the developers are also working on support for viewing and editing hidden HTML comments. VisualEditor will be available to all users on mobile devices and tablet computers. It will be possible to upload images to Commons from inside VisualEditor.

If you have questions or suggestions for future improvements, or if you encounter problems, please let everyone know by posting a note at mw:VisualEditor/Feedback or by joining the office hours on Thursday, 19 June 2014 at 10:00 UTC. If you'd like to get this newsletter on your own page (about once a month), please subscribe at w:en:Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Newsletter for English Wikipedia only or at meta:VisualEditor/Newsletter for any project. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) 22:16, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Dear Wikipedia Ambassador,

I am seeking input on your experience as a mentor to new Wikipedians. This survey is designed to provide insight for the development of a new mentorship support tool on Wikipedia. If you have a moment, please take this survey, it should not take more than 10 minutes of your time to complete.

https://syracuseuniversity.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_4V2SSrhU2NFOVAV

Also, if you are able to, I would greatly appreciate it if you would send the following survey to the mentee you worked with:

https://syracuseuniversity.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_4V1quUdMZ1By3Ah

Thank you in advance for your participation, Gabriel Mugar 13:33, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to work on Mano Saxena's page but it seems it has been deleted. I have new material and sources. Could you please move the article to my sandbox so I can work on it? Thanks. Peluchon ( talk) 20:47, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Please read this. Cheers, Pdfpdf ( talk) 06:30, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Woo hoo! White Knight to the rescue?
How's the editathon going? Pdfpdf ( talk) 12:35, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Had a few people turn up, and we had a lot of really valuable discussion. We've locked in 6 July as a day long session focused on North Terrace, with cameras to take photos as requried - 11:30 am to 7:30 pm, with pizza provided. We've had a few ideas about promotion. It should be fun. :) - Bilby ( talk) 12:40, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Bilby, please take a look at the article Angus Taylor (politician). There has been significant discussion and proposed edits that would seem to address the BLP issues raised. The COI complainant appears to have gone missing immediately after succeeding in her goal to shut down the page. It's probably past due time that a process of reinstating appropriate content is commenced. ArthurSkittle ( talk) 04:52, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Bilby, I refer you back to the article Angus Taylor (politician). I think it's time to unlock the page. ArthurSkittle ( talk) 13:35, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

This is awkward, on Heleen Mees twitter page, a guy claiming to be an admin on wikipedia promised to edit her article on her behalf (now deleted). Within 24 hrs of publishing you're adding an article reference to her wikipedia entry. I have to ask, do you have a personal connection with her? W C M _email 21:49, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

I can understand your concern. No, I don't have a personal connection, and I never promised to edit on her behalf. It appears that she is overstating what I said some weeks ago. At the time, I said that I would consider some changes she proposed on her talk page. I was willing to consider the suggestions she made in the same sense that I would consider changes suggested by any subject of a BLP, as we would with communications via OTRS or on talk pages, but I'm not willing to edit on anyone's behalf but my own. :)

The edit I just made was the result of a talk page discussion, in which it seemed we decided that we shouldn't mention that she was writing for Capital as there was no evidence that any articles by her had been published. I noticed that she had now been published, so I figured that it was correct to mention it. I became aware that she had been published in Capital via a Google search. - Bilby ( talk) 23:29, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I wanted to bring this to your attention. [5]. Looks like another sock, editing the same articles as the others. Thanks. Logical Cowboy ( talk) 00:09, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that - it certainly seems like a duck. (Picking those two unrelated articles is too much of a coincidence to treat any other way). I'lll block and delete if there hasn't been any movement, but I'm off to give a lecture so I'll have to handle it later today. An SPI would help, as I suspect there are a lot of other socks to dig up - I'll leave a note to that effect on the SPI. - Bilby ( talk) 00:31, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Re the article you mentioned on the Wales talk page: Egad, which one was that? Maybe I ought to get on the gravy train myself. That's good money. Coretheapple ( talk)

FYI - I brought it back up at COIN here. I find many of the circumstances surrounding this article very suspicious. I think the $5 per edit offer on Jimbo's Talk page was shared on that discussion string because it's related. In other words, some editors are being paid $5 an edit to make them look bad and others are looking to make them look positive in order to cash in on the $10k.

This does make me wonder, in my paranoia, if the admin adding full protection to the attack page filled with junk sources is paid as well. But since we have no way of proving anything, what can we do?

Sadly, I'll probably just move on elsewhere. It took 3 months to fight off a POV pusher on Matthew Bryden and just as long to fight off an army of secretly paid accounts on Suburban Express and it's a very draining exercise. ( user:DGG knows about both of those)

Do you know anyone that might be better suited for the task? Who likes fighting POV pushers and uncovering these Wikipedia manipulation schemes?

CorporateM ( Talk) 01:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

For starters, I wouldn't post paranoid speculation on Wikipedia with no proof. Most editors would take great offense at the insinuation they are editing for pay. And that goes triple if you are insinuating an admin was paid to use his tools. Black Kite even promptly reduced the protection when you asked. -- NeilN ^{talk to me} 03:18, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

I haven't seen many ads asking for people to negatively edit articles about others - there has been one or two, but it is rare. I don't think it is generally necessary, though - due to the nature of the media, controversial or negative commentary tends to be easier to come by than positive accounts, and people with strong negative views of an organisation are common, especially regarding an organisation through which they can loose money. Plus, when we get situations where there is a clear attempt by someone to remove negative comments, it isn't unusual for it to raise the hackles of more established editors. We don't need to assume conspiracy, so much as standard editing practices, both good and bad. :)

There are a few people who like to edit against COI editors, but to be honest, my general feeling is that what we need aren't anti-COI editors, but neutral editors actively fighting for neutrality, if that makes sense. I'll check my db, though, and see what I have in regards to Banc De Binary editing that may be valuable. I think I have a couple of entries than can be used to get a picture. - Bilby ( talk) 04:46, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, but in this case the context is that there is a specific ad offering cash for negative edits and an involved admin has added page protection to the article twice now. Surely our admins know our NPOV and V policies well-enough to realize protecting the page in that version is inappropriate. CorporateM ( Talk) 22:29, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Hey, you don't understand WP:PRIMARY (and enforce it very selectively) so I wouldn't be throwing stones... -- NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:19, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

This edit request to Banc De Binary has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Regards, Bilby. I am a manager at Banc De Binary with a disclosed conflict of interest. Banc De Binary is concerned that the article continues to violate various Wikipedia policies in its present protected state. It also appears I am unable to edit the talk page, so I have decided to ask administrators familiar with the case to review some of the most obvious edit requests.

This request is for the "orphan" template to be removed from the page, as the page is linked by three or four other articles. This should be straightforward and should not require obtaining a consensus because of its clear-cut nature. This would involve deleting the entire second line of the article code as it stands now.

My intent is to organize discussion on the talk page if I am allowed to edit there. I believe, based on discussion with an OTRS volunteer, that there is consensus for "stubbing" the article, and that "stubbing" would also reduce the number of requests and potential for cross-talk. I would like your assistance with the edit request and your advice on bringing the article into Wikipedia compliance by "stubbing" or other means. BDBIsrael ( talk) 16:04, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

• Shouldn't this request template be at the article talk page? Also, re the last paragraph, I think that it is inappropriate for a corporate employee to "organize discussion" on the talk page of an article about the company. Coretheapple ( talk) 16:12, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
  • Regards, Coretheapple. Yes, I believe the request should have been at the talk page, but I am unable to edit there. However, if I can determine how to edit the page, it is my goal to ensure that Banc De Binary's interests are communicated there and that Wikipedia policy is upheld. If "organizing discussion" is the wrong term for this, I am grateful for your correction.
  • I was also notified that you commented at the article talkpage. Your comments seem to refer to press releases about the open negotiations rather than about the social marketing protocols. The Board's decision was not in reference to any particular comments, but in reference to a general misconception about Banc De Binary's relationship with Wikipedia that seems widespread. However, I will certainly recommend to our PR department that they supplement the Board's emergency action with appropriate press releases, whether they relate to social marketing or the open negotiations or other topics. That final decision is not mine to make. I will update the appropriate thread if such a release ensues. BDBIsrael ( talk) 16:31, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

No, you can edit there. I will reference your request on that page. Coretheapple ( talk) 16:42, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Also: I think that you guys need to settle on one account to represent your interest here. Honestly, dealing with your company on Wikipedia is a real time suck. You folks have got to mend your ways. This is getting ridiculous. Coretheapple ( talk) 16:52, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Coretheapple. I appreciate your conveying the request and your frank opinions. It is my understanding that I am not here to represent BDB's independent interests but to work toward neutral coverage of the company and other topics. That said, it is obvious that BDB has an interest in the same. I am also quite in agreement with you about the personal time resources required to accomplish this task. As you probably know, BDB has dealt with a pattern of harmful rumor and potential slander for nearly a year, while our attempts to correct the most basic information in the article have been defeated by various tactics. I trust the Board's decision to ask me to interact with Wikipedia personally has not been ill-founded. I have been personally responsible for establishing new protocols across the board in regulating social networking resources used by employees and contractors, and so I am interested in hearing about additional mending we can accomplish; for this I have a user talkpage. BDBIsrael ( talk) 17:21, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Done I've removed the orphan tag, as it seems uncontroversial, and the mainspace pages to it seem legitimate. I've also made User:BDBIsrael confirmed so that they can post at Talk:Banc De Binary. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 17:29, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

@ Coretheapple: Just in case you didn't catch this from earlier in the discussion, the BDB article talk page has been semi-protected due to disruption from IPs, so BDBIsrael would have been unable to make comments there earlier. -- Atama 頭 18:57, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

This Month in Education – Volume 3, Issue 6, June 2014 Headlines Wikipedia Education Project in Uruguay Sanothimi Campus celebrates 12 years of Nepali Wikipedia Wikipedia Primary School Project Israeli Ministry of Education and Wikipedia collaboration: teachers and students will be trained to write Wikipedia articles Wikimedia Serbia teacher education course accredited by the Republic of Serbia Geneva education department produces two films on Wikipedia editing by students Busy 2014 for Education at Wikimedia UK, so far Getting ready for WikiCamp 2014 Armenia News from Tec de Monterrey, Mexico City Campus Wikimedia Deutschland: Summary of activities in May 2014 Czech senior citizen program supported by a WMF grant Wikimedia Sverige: Classrooms and ambassadors Wiki Education Foundation attends WikiConference USA Update on the education portal Articles of interest in other publications Highlights  · Single page edition To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 05:12, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

I see nothing in WP:BLP that would prohibit including the text I've inserted, furthermore one of the two names mentioned is no longer living. What exactly is the issue MikeyLin ( talk) 00:08, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I hope that this message finds you well! I note that you deleted the article Joel Fu (entrepreneur) on 15 June 2014 with notes (G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban (TW)). I can not comment on that, but someone is looking to recreate that page. I looked underneath it/at the subject, and aside from the original being horribly promotional, can not see how that person would presently pass WP:NOTAB. I advised them of this, but I doubt that they will listen to this advice! Rgds, - Trident13 ( talk) 14:29, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Ain't it handy that I can "vent my spleen" tomorrow night! Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:09, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

(P.S. I think you might need to consider archiving the contents of your talk page ... Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:12, 24 June 2014 (UTC))

Hello, I can see that you deleted Damien Miller (an article which I approved from AfC) as a G5 (which does not apply if it had substantial edits by others, like me). I added an infobox, accepted it from Draft-space (AfC) and I wrote it a DYK, which I think makes G5 invalid. I don't know who was the blocked user and I honestly don't care. This is an encyclopedia and that article was suitable and notable to be included in Wikipedia, no matter if the user was blocked/banned, what ever.

I please ask you to reconsider the deletion of the article and as always: "Happy editing!" ( t)  Josve05a ( c) 15:53, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bilby. I went ahead and restored the article as there have been substantial edits by other editors and was up for a DYK nomination which was declined solely on the basis that the article was deleted. While I agree that it likely initially met the letter of CSD G5, we are ultimately here to build an encyclopedia and we shouldn't let "the rules" stand in the way of doing so. Please do not consider this wheel warring, and if you completely disagree with my evaluation of the situation you are more than welcome to re-delete the article. Best, Tiptoety ^talk 17:02, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I disagree, on the grounds that we're getting into a situation where Russavia is de-facto unbanned, as he is free to continue to edit as all of his work with socks is immediately accepted. I'm not comfortable with a situation where a community consensus to ban is effectively made redundant mere days after it was made through this process. That said, it was always going to be undeleted, and I was certainly not going to stand in anyone's way if they wanted to make that call. So I may disagree, but I won't object, if that makes sense. (I was considering Josve05a's request anyway, but I think in the end I would have been unable to restore it because of my concerns about the process we're seeing). - Bilby ( talk) 17:08, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I respect your position Bilby, truly I do. I'd be happy to ask for another administrator to weigh in here, if you like. Tiptoety ^talk 17:10, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

There's no need - I think in the end the result will be the same, given the situation, although we might see a bit more drama before it is done, and I'd rather save everyone from that. :) We're in a position where only one person has to accept Russavia's edits, and they become fine. Normally this wouldn't be an issue, as banned editors either don't have the support for this to occur, or don't continue to sock on this level. But the conflict comes from the provisions in policy, so that's how things sit. I seem to recall the reverse case with Peter Damien, who added content with the expectation that it would be deleted so that he could make his point that way. - Bilby ( talk) 17:21, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lena Nyadbi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kimberley. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:51, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Free this weekend? Please see Wikipedia:Meetup/Adelaide/Future meetings#Technical Mentors - Unleashed (GovHack Adelaide) for details. Alex Sims ( talk) 11:38, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure I'm already down as a mentor for it. :) If not, I'm a competitor (especially for MoD) - but it should be the former. - Bilby ( talk) 12:51, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

14:07, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello! I know this is rather late, but just wanted to pop by and thank you for this edit you made on my behalf to Robert J. Sawyer! (Sorry for the mobile diff; I'm writing this from my phone. Also, apologies for the delay in thanking you. I only just now saw your edit!) While I'm definitely not new to Wikipedia, I am new to having a COI, so I wanted to play it safe and post to the talk page rather than updating the article myself. Again, thank you for checking out my request :) Cheers, and happy editing! cymru.lass ( talk • contribs) 17:35, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi! A few days ago I edited the Tim Leffel article. You said me that the article was ok, and you asked me to make a disclosure, as you can see on my talk page /info/en/?search=User_talk:Ane_wiki. Now an editor is questioning the article and he has reinstalled the removed templates. Can you come to the article´s talk page to give us your opinion and to solve the problem? Thank you.-- Ane wiki ( talk) 22:17, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, I'd hoped to help out on this today, but I kept getting caught up. I'll see if I can assist in the morning, though - my apologies for not being able to do anything earlier. - Bilby ( talk) 13:49, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

While/when you're over on the talk page for this article, would you mind taking a look at the two brand new, IP-only accounts that are commenting anti-deletion? Please note, the subject has been editing his own page since 2009. Feels like sockpuppetry, or conceivably meatpuppetry to me, looking at the limited engagement on the page and, in particular, the talk page over its (rather chequered) history, but I could be wrong, and they're just brand new users who happened to stumble on the page and have very strong opinions. If you could cast an eye over them, or run CheckUser if you have access, that would be great. I know there are more worthwhile things you could be doing - sorry! AdventurousMe ( talk) 16:22, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

There's now a third brand new, apparently single-purpose account, popped up on the afD page for the article, here Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tim_Leffel - User:Andyopteris. Is this normal for deletion discussions on BLP? Really feels like sockpuppetry to me, particularly given the history of the article. AdventurousMe ( talk) 02:52, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

My apologies. User:Andyopteris is not a single-use account. The two IPs are single-use accounts. AdventurousMe ( talk) 04:04, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

It is a long time ago (2011) that the Ratel/TickleMeister/Jabbsworth-case was in full focus. Yesterday, I came across some edits on Philip Nitschke by user "Jabba the Hot", which set of the alarm bells. I can't really pinpoint it, but the tone of his edits is what worries me. And gave me the idea of a relation with Ratel. Older edits on Nitschke and on YourLastRight.com fuel the worries.

Perhaps I am wrong, so I like your opinion. The Banner  talk 04:37, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

I'll do some digging tomorrow - it might not be the same person, but it is worth looking into. - Bilby ( talk) 13:51, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I'm wondering if you could expand the article Commons:How to take pictures for Wikimedia Commons, particularly the section on photographing objects? Alex Sims ( talk) 08:17, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

hello again! Please remember to go to /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tim_Leffel-- Ane wiki ( talk) 23:09, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Dear User:Bilby, hello! I appreciate your message on my talk page as well as your effort to uphold the integrity of Wikipedia. After seeing your message on my talk page, I along with a couple other editors, developed Template:Paid article so all editors who are being paid to create articles (or edit them) can add them to the the talk pages of those articles (per bullet two under the section "Paid contributions without disclosure") if they wish to do so. This template is great because by clicking the " What links here" button, one can access all of the articles that have paid contributions to ensure that vital policies, such as WP:NPOV, are fulfilled in those paid articles. I have advised other editors to practice disclosure when creating paid articles as well by using this template. To date, I have added this template to all completed projects that I have received payment for. What do you think about mentioning the template at WP:COI? I write this message to you because I just noticed that you mentioned my name here. I am assuming that you did not leave a message on my talk page, as you did with others, about the Nofel Izz article because I added disclosure on that talk page. I hope you are having a great weekend thus far. Let me know if you have any questions. With regards, Anupam ^Talk 23:46, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

@ Anupam Where I have a COI/financial connection, I typically use Template:Connected contributor, which is currently used on more than 4,000 pages. It's not as explicit/direct as your proposed template, but I think it would be a technicality/nit-pick for someone to say I am not complying with the ToU because the standard template uses the word "may" and "professional affiliation" rather than "financial connection." It should do the trick I think. CorporateM ( Talk) 13:53, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	Dear Bilby, I award you the Special Barnstar for your effort to uphold the integrity of Wikipedia! Keep up the good work! You are making a difference here! With regards, Anupam Talk 23:49, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bilby! I noticed you've made some edits to Derwick Associates in the past and I recently made some changes to the page, along with related pages, myself to try and improve it. I wanted to invite you to take a look at the current version and see what you think. Righteousskills ( talk) 08:19, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

You blocked him as a sock, but there was no SPI and no evidence presented (that I am aware of). I can't find similar unblock requests from other socks in the SPI. His explanations don't seem immediately false. Can you share some insight into your block before I process the unblock request? Thanks. ☺ ·  Salvidrim! ·  ✉ 13:26, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Were you going to follow up with problems we'd been discussion here? Johnmoor ( talk · contribs) seems to be looking to repeat his past one last time. -- Ronz ( talk) 15:44, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Nofel Izz (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), particularly Talk:Nofel Izz#Puffery, and other talks like User talk:Johnmoor#If you have a problem with my editing, bring it to an appropriate forum which originates from User talk:Ronz#Primary Sources and User talk:Johnmoor#Please do not remove maintenance templates while the concerns are under discussion which originates from User talk:Ronz#Edit warring on Nofel Izz should shed more light on this. Thank you. — JOHNMOORofMOORLAND ( talk) 18:25, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Johnmoor, those have nothing to do with the matter, other than your involvement. -- Ronz ( talk) 20:45, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I started an RfC, and it's resulted in some of the same editors taking notice. Do you still think they are all paid editors? -- Ronz ( talk) 16:52, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm chasing it up. Renzoy16 is a paid editor previously hired to work on the article, but I don't know if he is currently being employed to do so. JohnMoor is still being paid to edit the article. BiH is a paid editor previously hired for the article, and is currently working for them. I had hoped that they would started seeing sense and follow the ToU. It looks like they won't. I'm going to have to line up the ducks and look to blocks. - Bilby ( talk) 11:24, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Clarifying, Renzoy16's contract has been very long term, and is still open with the client. So Renzoy16, JohnMoor & BiH can still be regarded as paid editors. - Bilby ( talk) 15:06, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Ronz ( talk) 16:25, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

User:Ronz, WP:FOC would do you much good! — JOHNMOORofMOORLAND ( talk) 20:42, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

We appear to differ on what is good for Wikipedia, which appears a result of your COI. Please do FOC on the article talk page though. -- Ronz ( talk) 15:45, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

You reverted my tagging of Anita Sarkeesian's article, which required citations on the 2nd paragraph, but your response was that the citations are included in the body, I don't believe that is acceptable. The citations should be provided where the claims first appear, not tucked away somewhere in the body. Claims in the lead should including citations with further explanation in the body not the other way around. Can you please revert back to my changes unless you can prove me wrong by citing WP policy, otherwise I will go ahead and revert your good faith revert back to my version. Syanaee ( talk) 23:51, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I will check for a response sometime at 10am BST tomorrow. I am going to bed right now. Syanaee ( talk) 00:03, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Under the citation policy, non-controversial statements in the lead, where they are cited in the body, do not need additional citations. As the lead is intended to be a summary, it is sometimes regarded as making it overly complex to duplicate citations that also appear in the body of the article where the full text of the statement is provided, although it varies considerably according to the different styles in different articles. I've always been in two minds about it, but I tend to defer to whatever the existing standard is on an article. Quotations, of course, are always cited. - Bilby ( talk) 00:09, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Additionally, WP:LEADCITE states "citations in a lead should be determined on a case-by-case basis by editorial consensus" and the consensus on that article has been to keep references in the body. Obviously, consensus can change, but this should be discussed at Talk:Anita Sarkeesian. Sorry, didn't mean to intrude, just thought I'd throw that in there. Cheers! Woodroar ( talk) 00:17, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

@ Woodroar:, @ Bilby:, I know I might be being a bit of a pain however since this is a biography of a living person can we move the tags to the lead, I'm in favour of having a discussion on this, and establishing a consensus, I have also noticed at least one citation in the body which might not meet the standard of WP citation policy, it refers to a blog post, which is posted on kickstarter, which may not meet the reliability standard. Since I have noticed similar issues on Pz myers (which I had also tagged and was reverted back by @ Johnuniq: stating it was drive-by-tagging), and on the Thunderf00t article. Pz's article has issue of relying on self-published referencing, all thrice of these articles need to be checked thoroughly, which I would like to help on and bring them to a higher standard, not give undue weight to some citations, and bring in line with balance and neutrality. Of course I can discuss each of these points thoroughly on each article's talk page, and hopefully get more editors involved to bring these articles to a higher standard i.e. hopefully to GA standard. Anita's article isn't too bad, but the other two require considerable work, which I can help put in. This is my opinion. In the long run this will help with problematic editing where some editors feel there is a bias on one or more of these articles. I would like to get your opinions on my suggestions. Thanks. Syanaee ( talk) 08:23, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

You will definitely want to bring your concerns to Talk:Anita Sarkeesian, where a discussion has already started regarding citations in the lead. Just a friendly head's up, though: using certain tags without starting a Talk page discussion—"drive-by tagging"—is increasingly viewed as WP:POINT behavior. Obviously, adding an Unreferenced tag to an unreferenced article is one thing, but adding a Primary Sources tag to an article with at least 10 third-party sources is another. Not to say you're wrong in preferring third-party sources, but when other editors remove a questionable tag, it tends to get you noticed for the wrong reasons. Anyways, see you on Talk:Anita Sarkeesian. Cheers! Woodroar ( talk) 08:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bilby. You blocked this user as a sock back in July - do you remember who the sockmaster was? There is a new editor ( Svenstpaul) who has appeared at Troy Fodemski and it seems likely to me that they're another sock. I thought it would be related to Sibtain 007 but I can't find Greg115 there. Cheers SmartSE ( talk) 19:18, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Doh. I should have checked their userpage! SmartSE ( talk) 19:20, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

[6]. Sources are key, 'jumping to conclusions' only source is the person jumping. Reliable sources don't jump. At best, it's WP:OR, which is also a BLP vio. "Oh, I read this, so I think THIS.".....um no, what do the sources say? Not what you jump to conclusions on what they say. Dreadstar ☥ 03:40, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Please stop. Wikipedia is not censored. Any further changes which have the effect of censoring an article, such as you did to Talk:Depression Quest, will be regarded as vandalism. If you continue in this manner, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You are not to remove talk page comments that are not vandalism Retartist ( talk) 12:02, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

@ Retartist: Have you read {{ uw-dttr}}? *cough* ^^^ *cough* ( t)  Josve05a ( c) 12:04, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I have an issue with blatant censorship and no explanation, i don't care how long an editor has been around if my comments are reverted with no explanation Retartist ( talk) 12:07, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

To be honest, I was hoping that you would understand - a message left on your talk page is public, and so I was hoping you'd just rethink your post without it needing to be highlighted. But leaving highly negative and (in this case) incorrect statements about living people, even on talk pages, runs fairly heavily into BLP. - Bilby ( talk) 12:10, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

added new comment removed libel but keeping the message, we hate censorship, i'm going to bed, also the info was true just unsourceable Retartist ( talk) 12:14, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

You reverted Zoe Quinn claiming lack of consensus and claimed that the revisions violated the biography of a living person guidelines; however, had you read the talk page, you'd find that we'd spoken about this and had worked on hashing out finding RSes for the various issues involved; all of the sources in the article were written by news organizations with editoral staffs, and met with RS standards. You didn't even leave a note on the talk page saying what you found inappropriate about the section; it was worded neutrally, was sourced using only reliable sources, was not derogatory, and covered the issue in a neutral manner. Simply coming along and reverting a page without even bothering to contribute to the talk page, merely claiming lack of consensus and deleting the revisions so that they could not be recovered is unacceptable behavior. Please assume good faith in the future and work with editors in the article's talk space instead of coming along and reverting, especially given that the previous reversion had issues with WP:BIAS. If you found some section of that specifically violated the biography of living persons, please make a note of it; removing it would be fine if you actually explained what it was, but surely the whole section was not a violation. Titanium Dragon ( talk) 23:11, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I did assume good faith - I have no doubt that you meant well by including it in the article. But the extensive discussion on the talk page has focused on how to tackle this, with the current consensus supporting the minimal version that was there before. The issue is not simply of sourcing (although one of the most contentious claims you added was sourced to Talking Ship, which in turn was directly referencing the ex's blog post), but also of due weight and appropriateness of the content. The current consensus was the Talk:Zoe Quinn#Bold edit discussion, and that was very different from your additions. - Bilby ( talk) 23:27, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Why did you delete that article? Titanium Dragon ( talk) 20:43, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Apologies; re-reading the deletion log you were just cleaning up after another admin who didn't do it properly. I shall go discuss with User:RHaworth. Titanium Dragon ( talk) 20:44, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Could you please change back the visibility of this revision from an IP user at the AfD for GamerGate? Removing it from the discussion was the right thing to do, but it shouldn't be fully removed from view as it didn't contain gross nor demeaning material nor personal identifiable information, so it should be available through history, and personal attacks are not a reason for revdel. History pages are all about accountability, and such removals hurt non-admin users like me. Thanks! Diego ( talk) 08:50, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Diego. I had a look, as I thought my understanding of what was posted might have been incorrect, but sadly no - the edit contained libel intended to smear the subject, and as such warrants the additional removal from the history. On the plus side, I can't see it being of any use in the discussion, and the post was very unlikely to have had an effect on the outcome of the AfD. - Bilby ( talk) 10:19, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok thanks, I'm still working on my understanding of what's oversightable information and what can be considered libel. Diego ( talk) 12:07, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Good morning Bilby! The politician usually referred to as Vaiben Louis Solomon is at present on a page Vaiben Solomon and Vaiben Louis Solomon is a redirect page. The only problem is that he had an uncle Vaiben Solomon (no middle name) who, though probably not needing his own article, does get a few mentions in Wikipedia. Assuming you agree, could you please swap the page and redirect for me? (I could do it by cutting and pasting but not sure that's kosher.) I can do the appropriate hatnote. I think I've ensured that all relevant articles use the full length version of his name. Doug butler ( talk) 23:01, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I recently added a section to Opponents of Assisted Suicide that you edited out. I was wondering what were your reasons? And what I can do to fix it.

True Dignity Vermont is a notable organization in the fight against Assisted Suicide in Vermont and the United States. It is well known in Vermont, as well as by other opposition groups, becoming one of the primary news sources for both.

Thank you, Sirhair ( talk) 21:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

• Wikipedia Education Collaborative welcomes five new members
• Wikimedia Deutschlands recent activities: events, events and more events
• Working with Wikipedia expands at Tec de Monterrey
• Digital agenda for education and open badges to be tested
• Most successful Czech course continues again this year
• Articles of interest in other publications

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Steve Rizzo may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page(Click show ⇨)

Laughter is the Best Medicine |author=[[Mehmet Oz|Dr. Mehmet Oz]] |publisher=''[[Oprah Radio]] (via [[The Oprah Winfrey Show|Oprah.com]]'' |date=December 8, 2006 |accessdate=June 5, 2013}}</ref> Way to Success in Business and in Life, with a foreword by Jeffrey Gitomer © 2013 by Steve Rizzo > Description |publisher=''[[McGraw-Hill]]'' |accessdate=June 5, 2013}}</ref> * http://steverizzomedia.com/ Steve Rizzo Media

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 05:55, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Dreadstar ☥ 16:15, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

This notice relates to Gamergate controversy, Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian, and related articles and edits, but note this this alert applies to all edits related to the area identified above. Dreadstar ☥ 16:17, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I was aware of this, yes. I'm not sure why you're leaving the message, but so be it. - Bilby ( talk) 16:24, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Virtually all editors contributing to those articles are being notified, it's not just you. Dreadstar ☥ 20:17, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I assumed that. :) - Bilby ( talk) 21:31, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Increased support for devices and browsers

TemplateData editor

Other changes

Several interface messages and labels were changed to be simpler, clearer, or shorter, based on feedback from translators and editors. The formatting of dialogs was changed, and more changes to the appearance will be coming soon, when VisualEditor implements the new MediaWiki theme from Design. (A preview of the theme is available on Labs for developers.) The team also made some improvements for users of the Monobook skin that improved the size of text in toolbars and fixed selections that overlapped menus.

VisualEditor-MediaWiki now supplies the mw-redirect or mw-disambig class on links to redirects and disambiguation pages, so that user gadgets that colour in these in types of links can be created.

Templates' fields can be marked as 'required' in TemplateData. If a parameter is marked as required, then you cannot delete that field when you add a new template or edit an existing one ( bug 60358). 

Language support improved by making annotations use bi-directional isolation (so they display correctly with cursoring behaviour as expected) and by fixing a bug that crashed VisualEditor when trying to edit a page with a dir attribute but no lang set ( bug 69955).

Looking ahead

Supporting your wiki

Hi, I notice you've reverted my edits at these two articles. The issue has gained very wide coverage in all Australian media in the past two days — it is literally front page news in every city — and has been presented in a cautious manner and based on very reliable media sources. I believe it complies with BLP. BlackCab ( TALK) 10:29, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Interesting too, that you've tagged my edits as RD2: "Grossly insulting, degrading, or offensive material that has little/no encyclopedic or project value ... slurs, smears, and grossly offensive material". I would say the widespread media coverage this has received would certainly elevate it to the level of encyclopedic notability. Peris has made a speech in the Senate in response, going about as public as one could ever do. I think your reversion is overkill, particularly given the statement in WP:RVDL: "Material must be grossly offensive, with little likelihood of significant dissent about its removal. Otherwise it should not be removed." A response from you would be nice. BlackCab ( TALK) 11:06, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi BlackCab. My apologies fro not replying sooner - I was in transit, saw the edit, and had to respond quickly, but it wasn't until now when I could sit down and follow things up. My concern was not whether or not the issue warrants coverage - it does, I believe, warrant a mention on the article about Peris, although I'm far from certain that it is worth mentioning on the Ato Boldon article. However, what you wrote was a significant BLP concern, as you went beyond what the sources said to make serious allegations about Peris. The wording will have to be far more careful. Not that I'm at home I'll see if I can come up with something that will work, although I think that we may more than those two sources. - Bilby ( talk) 11:31, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

I actually think I provided the minimum information to describe the events that have become news. I think the absence of material smacks of censorship, but I'll certainly be interested to see something there, whatever you can manage. BlackCab ( TALK) 11:42, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Please mail Fargum to me. I wanna complete and correct it. Thanks-- Freshman404 ^Talk 12:14, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Recent improvements

TemplateData

Looking ahead

You can influence VisualEditor's design. Tell the VisualEditor team what you want changed during the office hours via IRC. The next sessions are on Wednesday, 19 November at 16:00 UTC and on Wednesday 7 January 2015 at 22:00 UTC. You can also share your ideas at  mw:VisualEditor/Feedback.

— Whatamidoing (WMF) 20:41, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#GamerGate and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—

• Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Requests for arbitration;
• Wikipedia:Arbitration guide.

Thanks,-- The Devil's Advocate _{tlk. cntrb.} 00:46, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the heads up on the BLP issues there. I appreciate you keeping an eye out for that. If you have any further issues there, please let me know. Titanium Dragon ( talk) 09:27, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hate to bother you again, but there's another IP back reverting material into that article, hours after the protection expires, natch. Should probably be long-term semi-protected. 08:10, 13 November 2014 (UTC)=

Hello and thank you for contacting me. Sorry for my late reply, I was personally away from home for a few days and I do not like to contribute via mobile phone. First of all, thank you for your polite and informative message, unlike some other editors that were not so polite and that were jumping to conclusions - something that most users hate on Wikipedia. I want to say that if I am offered money for my edits in the future, I will properly disclose it on article's talk page, as suggested. Thank you again. -- BiH ( talk) 15:02, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello,

I have searched in vain for the good path to get administrator’s help for the following issue and so I decided to send this request to some including you.

I have considerably expanded the article Guerrilla filmmaking and took care in referencing it as far as I could (over 90 links to trustful sources). I am an experienced editor of Wikipedia. For my surprise, the article was reverted by user CIRT to a preceding stub version mainly consisting of a very narrow list of films. Many important contents were removed. Self promotional vandalism seems to be the reason of such intervention, sustained by acute threats. I do not intend to respond with helpless and inconsequent arguments and the time I have to dedicate to Wikipedia is quite limited.

I’d be happy if you could pay some attention to this occurrence and let you decide whatever you think is reasonable.

My best,

Tertulius ( User talk:Tertulius) 04,44, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm happy to have a look, but I'm a bit caught up for a couple for a while today. I'll be able to see what I can do later today, though. - Bilby ( talk) 04:52, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 11, 2014, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/GamerGate/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Ks0stm ^{( T• C• G• E)} 22:26, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Christina Hoff Sommers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tikkun. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:04, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

• Sweden: Swedish teacher wins national award for teaching with Wikimedia projects
• Greece: Greek university giving credit for translation of Wikipedia articles
• Greece: Wikipedia in Secondary and Adult Education: presentation at CIE2014 in Corfu, Greece
• Serbia & Hungary: Wikicamp 2014 in Serbia and Hungary brings chapters together
• Bulgaria: Bulgarian college students will explore Wikipedia in a new lecture course on "New Media and Participatory Culture"
• Bulgaria: Bulgarian college teachers "became nodes" in the Wikipedia Network
• Israel: 9th grade students in Be'er Sheva, Israel conclude a year-long project on Wikipedia
• Mexico: New classes and activities at Tec de Monterrey
• Catalonia: Education Program Extension enabled on Catalan Wikipedia
• Ukraine: Education Program Extension enabled on Ukrainian Wikipedia
• Netherlands: Education Program Extension enabled on Dutch Wikipedia
• WMF: Data Collection Round II has started: be part
• Articles of interest in other publications: Poland, Philippines, United States, WikiProject Medicine, Jimmy Wales, and more

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:55, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

• France: Wikimedia France obtains an agreement from the French Ministry of Education
• Mexico: Tec de Monterrey wrapping up semester projects
• Mexico: A student in Mexico makes the best of her study to edit Wikipedia
• Egypt: Egyptian Student invites his colleagues at Al-Azhar University to edit Wikipedia
• Sweden: Successful Wikipedia assignments presented by faculty at national conference in Sweden
• Global: Wikipedia Education Collaborative members meet in Edinburgh
• Global: Iberoconf discusses Wikipedia in education
• Global:Welcoming new WMF staff supporting education
• Articles of interest in other publications: MIT, Myanmar, and Jimmy Wales

The arbs are leaning toward a doubling of the usual limits on evidence for this specific case. I am still waiting for final sign-off, but it seems likely that most participants will not need to trim evidence. Three relevant points:

• Given the substantial increase in limits, the usual acceptance if counts go a bit over will not be granted. Treat the limits as absolute.
• The limits apply to both direct evidence and rebuttal to others.
• Despite the increase, it is highly desirable to be as succinct as possible. For the arbitration committee -- S Philbrick (Talk) 17:57, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

In the interests of making this case more easily manageable, it is likely that we will prune the parties list to limit it to those against whom evidence has been submitted. Therefore, if anyone has anything to add, now is the time to do so.

See the list of parties not included in the evidence as of 8 Dec 14.

Please note that the purpose of the /Evidence page is to provide narrative, context and all the diffs. As diffs can usually be interpreted in various ways, to avoid ambiguity, they should be appended to the allegation that's being made. If the material is private and the detail has been emailed to ArbCom, add [private evidence] instead of diffs.

The /Workshop page builds on evidence. FOFs about individual editors should contain a summary of the allegation made in /Evidence, and diffs to illustrate the allegation. Supplying diffs makes it easier for the subject of the FOF to respond and much easier for arbitrators to see whether your FOF has substance.

No allegations about other editors should be made either in /Evdence or in the /Workshop without supporting diffs. Doing so may expose you to findings of making personal attacks and casting aspersions.

Also, please note that the evidence lengths have been increased from about 1000 words and about 100 diffs for parties and about 500 words and about diffs for non-parties to a maximum of 2000 words and 200 diffs for parties and 1000 words and 100 diffs for non-parties. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 06:09, 10 December 2014 (UTC) Message delivered by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk)