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.

Precious

One year!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:01, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

A year already?? Wow, time flies! —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 22:44, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

story · music · places

Thank you for bringing Alfred Grosser to the Main page! - I thanked Seiji Ozawa, and have the story of Helga Paris today, a photographer of houses and faces. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:25, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

The image, taken on a cemetery last year after the funeral of a distant but dear family member, commemorates today, with thanks for their achievements, four subjects mentioned on the Main page and Vami_IV, a friend here. Listen to music by Tchaikovsky (an article where one of the four is pictured), sung by today's subject (whose performance on stage I enjoyed two days ago). -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:14, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

more music and flowers on Rossini's rare birthday -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:07, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).

Administrator changes Sdkb The Night Watch East718 Isabelle Belato Mzajac Staecker Stan Shebs Sugarfish Tamzin

Bureaucrat changes SilkTork

Guideline and policy news

• Phase I of the 2024 RfA review is now open for participation. Editors are invited to review, comment on, and propose improvements to the requests for adminship process.
• Following an RfC, the inactivity requirement for the removal of the interface administrator right increased from 6 months to 12 months.

Technical news

• The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. ( T353388)

Miscellaneous

• The 2024 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Doǵu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, MdsShakil, Minorax, Nehaoua, Renvoy and RoySmith as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
• Following the 2024 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Ajraddatz, Albertoleoncio, EPIC, JJMC89, Johannnes89, Melos and Yahya.

I am not wikipedia expert, but you seem to have made an article about Amala Ekpunobi which was then deleted? Is there a way to still see it? Do you have it in you own scratch environment? I would like to read it. AntonHogervorst ( talk) 13:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for taking action with 147.161.225.106. The proxy API checker seems to think this IP is a proxy/VPN. Is that enough evidence to warrant a substantially longer block?  — Archer1234 ( t· c) 15:01, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I've blocked them for six months instead, thanks for pointing that out. —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 15:03, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much .. both you and PhilKnight, who I sent a message to last night. This person is relentless. Regards, Bringingthewood ( talk) 22:18, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:

• Proposal 2, initiated by HouseBlaster, provides for the addition of a text box at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship reminding all editors of our policies and enforcement mechanisms around decorum.
• Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
• Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
• Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
• Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
• Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
• Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
• Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
• Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
• Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
• Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
• Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
• Proposal 18, initiated by theleekycauldron, provides for lowering the RfB target from 85% to 75%.
• Proposal 24, initiated by SportingFlyer, provides for a more robust alternate version of the optional candidate poll.
• Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
• Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
• Proposal 28, initiated by HouseBlaster, tightens restrictions on multi-part questions.

To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron ( talk • she/her), via:

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 10:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For revoking TPA here, just as I was about to request it. Cheers! JeffSpaceman ( talk) 17:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Sorry for causing you to have to delete Draft:Theresa Jackson twice in a row! Someone who's wrong on the internet ( talk) 22:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

I blocked said user wohm you seem to have missed when giving the block notice. Cheers. -- Alexf ^(talk) 19:39, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Ingenuity. I've got your User:Ingenuity/AbuseFilterContribs.js, I love it. Super helpful. But today I was checking out an IPv6 range, 2603:8081:5b00:65c::/64, which I ended up blocking for a month (nasty BLP vandalism, no constructive edits, from four IPs). 3 out of the four had made edits disallowed by the edit filter. But... it would be great if the /64 range contribs page also showed those filter interventions, so I didn't have to check the IPs individually. Another time it may obviously be a lot more than four IPs. Would that be possible? Bishonen | tålk 19:52, 19 March 2024 (UTC).

@ Bishonen: I'm afraid not... as far as I'm aware, the API doesn't support getting filter hits for ranges, unfortunately. —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 19:45, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Oh. OK. I guess it was a long shot. Thanks anyway. Bishonen | tålk 19:57, 20 March 2024 (UTC).

Good afternoon. A user that you unbanned last year has exhibited some worrying behavior. Please see Talk:Fishing cat and attached GANs, as well as User talk:Grungaloo. This kind of thing is not my forte, and I would appreciate another set of eyes from someone who is familiar with the situation. Please let me know your thoughts and your advice on the proper course of action. Fritzmann ( message me) 17:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

I've left a comment on their talk page. —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 18:16, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Look I have no idea how to deal with this. Gaslighting me on my talk page now, "Your actions have shown me that you hate me" & "I'll quit GA to make you happy". That's just... not okay lol.

I have looked at the user's other GANs and personally think that most of them (especially Megafauna, which has large uncited sections) would not pass a review at this stage. However, I don't want to be the one who goes and fails them because this user clearly has animosity towards me. I would appreciate assistance from an administrator who is better versed in dispute resolution to address this. Fritzmann ( message me) 22:19, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I saw a comment made by AkiraAnastasia12345 on their talk page that I thought I should bring to your attention. Their, they said: What if someone doxx your profile. You can't even use your name User:Ingenuity. I want to bring this to your attention because it seems like it might be a threat to dox you, but I'm not completely sure that that is the case, as it is worded oddly. GrayStorm^{( Talk| Contributions)} 23:24, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

I read that more as a "how would you feel if someone doxxed you", it doesn't really look like a threat to me. —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 01:00, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thats good. GrayStorm^{( Talk| Contributions)} 01:14, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

Women in Red | April 2024, Volume 10, Issue 4, Numbers 293, 294, 302, 303, 304 Online events: New: Alphabet run S & T | Gender studies | Health Continuing: #1day1woman | Education (year-long initiative) Announcements The second round of "One biography a week" begins in April as part of #1day1woman. Tip of the month: If you run into technical problems, you might find help on our Tools and technical support page Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

-- Lajmmoore ( talk 19:42, 30 March 2024 (UTC) via MassMessaging

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).

Administrator changes

• Kbdank71
• Kosack
• NrDg
• TLSuda

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to convert all current and future community discretionary sanctions to (community designated) contentious topics procedure.

Technical news

• The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. ( T313405)

Arbitration

• An arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".

Miscellaneous

• Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

Hello Ingenuity,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to Schminnte, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards

Onel5969 won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. Hey man im josh led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Does my single-GAN limit require me to withdraw multiple current nominations?- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

@ TonyTheTiger: yes, I think that would be best. However, you can keep nominations open if they're currently under review. —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 15:49, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your fair close. Looks like my support at RFA was justified. Lightburst ( talk) 19:54, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Dear Ingenuity, Hello, can you delete Hamza Shaikh page then after I'll able to accepted Draft:Hamza Shaikh from WP:AFC process.  Thanks ~~ αvírαm| (tαlk) 11:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

@ Aviram7: done. —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 14:06, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Dear Ingenuity, Thank you for you're immediate response to me and for fast action for about my request  Thanks ~~ αvírαm| (tαlk) 15:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

I saw your offer on AN, and am happy to take part in this panel. How do you propose we do this? Owen× ☎ 19:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

@ OwenX: once the AfD hits the seven-day mark (in a couple hours), I'll read through it and email you my preliminary thoughts. We can discuss the close from there. —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 20:05, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good! Owen× ☎ 20:10, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

OwenX Um, you should not be taking part in this close Owen, since you've already decided that the article should be kept.? Black Kite (talk) 22:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

I didn't think my participation in that DRV renders me WP:INVOLVED, and do not have strong views about the article either way. But since you raised the issue, let's take it to AN and see what others think. Owen× ☎ 22:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

OwenX Of course it renders you involved. But I don't think it needs to go to AN, I simply think you should leave the close to Ingenuity, because if you take part and the close is anything other than Delete, Merge or Redirect then there will be a controversy that we really don't need. Black Kite (talk) 22:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

That's a valid point. I already posted the question on AN, but will step aside for now. Owen× ☎ 23:00, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks (I had already posted at AN). To be clear, I'm not accusing you of being biased, only that there clearly would be an issue if anyone decided to take it to DRV (it would almost certainly be re-opened, and we definitely don't need a fourth AfD). Black Kite (talk) 23:02, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Fair point. I should have thought of that before spending over an hour carefully reviewing 140 !votes there... Owen× ☎ 23:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Thanks all for the work. — Alalch E. 02:10, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Ingenuity. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 02:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{ You've got mail}} or {{ ygm}} template.

I have sent you an email about requesting additions and a question about a private edit filter yesterday. Codename Noreste 🤔 𝙇𝙖 𝙎𝙪𝙢𝙖 02:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Responded. —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 18:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate your effort in closing the AfD... but not leaving a redirect is not a policy based outcome, and so I've corrected it. {{ R from non-neutral name}} signals that that title is disfavored, the history remains deleted, and random readers landing on that prior name are instead redirected to the much more succinct remaining section in the biography. Cheers, Jclemens ( talk) 08:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Makes sense. Thanks, @ Jclemens. —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 15:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Please amend the closure to enable the redirect not to get deleted. The Anome has now deleted and fully protected the redirect per your close: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Log&logid=161262546. If you feel like you need to talk to The Anome about undeleting the redirect, that would be great. The redirect should be undeleted. Ping Jclemens.— Alalch E. 09:56, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes. Given that you are fine with Jclemens' reasoning, I will now restore the redirect: can you please update your closing summary to reflect this? — The Anome ( talk) 09:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

The Anome What you have now restored is the whole page history and created a redirect - which suggests this was closed as "redirect" but it was not. It was closed as "delete". The redirect that Jclemens created was a delete and then redirect. As Jclemens says, the history remains deleted. The redirect is created after the deletion based on the assumption that someone will search this disfavoured term and want the primary article. Whether that is really a policy based outcome is unclear, but that was the intent, and not unreasonable based on the existence of a wikidata item. Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 10:21, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I assume Anome made a mistake here, so I've re-deleted the page and undeleted the correct revisions. —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 12:31, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks. And thanks for reading your way through all that AfD too! Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk) 13:57, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks to everyone for cleaning up the mess. That was indeed my mistake: I should only have reinstated the redirect. — The Anome ( talk) 16:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Can you please edit your AfD closure summary for Where is Kate? to reflect your recent comments? — The Anome ( talk) 10:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I've done that now. —  Ingenuity ( talk •  contribs) 12:19, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I think everything's sorted now. — The Anome ( talk) 16:11, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

My sincere thanks also. -- SergeWoodzing ( talk) 18:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

You might want to take this user's talk page access away. See [1]. Thanks! WizardGamer775 ( talk) 23:46, 9 April 2024 (UTC)