This page 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.

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2022).

Administrator changes Tamzin Barek • Darkwind • Geometry guy • ProcseeBot • RoyBoy • Sean Whitton • Valereee • Visorstuff • WAvegetarian Sn0wflake → VersedFenrir

CheckUser changes Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

• Several areas of improvement collated from community member votes have been identified in the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines. The areas of improvement have been sent back for review and you are invited to provide input on these areas.

Technical news

• Administrators using the mobile web interface can now access Special:Block directly from user pages. ( T307341)
• The IP Info feature has been deployed to all wikis as a Beta Feature. Any autoconfirmed user may enable the feature using the "IP info" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features. Autoconfirmed users will be able to access basic information about an IP address that includes the country and connection method. Those with advanced privileges (admin, bureaucrat, checkuser) will have access to extra information that includes the Internet Service Provider and more specific location.

Arbitration

• Remedy 2 of the Rachel Marsden case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to delete or reduce to a stub, together with their talk pages, articles related to Rachel Marsden when they violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy.
• An arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been closed.

Hello, how can I create a biography? -- Sng Uzzi ( talk) 19:01, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @ Sng Uzzi, please first skim through WP:1st as it provides useful information on creating your first article. Additional considerations apply if the article is about a living person. What subject are you writing about? Feel free to post questions below or ask for help when you get stuck. Happy editing! Just i yaya 19:18, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Justiyaya

Thank you for creating Topical Dancer.

User:North8000, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Nice work

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|North8000}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 ( talk) 13:17, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Hii When I can edit lock page -- Saymyname690 ( talk) 17:37, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @ Saymyname690, you might want to make an WP:edit request for that. I've looked through your contributions and revered some of them because they contained errors related to WP:NPOV and WP:Tone. Every beginner makes these mistakes when they are starting out. It would help your editing a lot if you went through WP:Introduction or The Wikipedia Adventure for a more interactive experience. Just i yaya 17:45, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

@ Saymyname690 Regarding the edit request, feel free to post here and I'll make the changes for you if you don't want to go through the process. I've also left a welcome message on your talk page that might help. Thanks for being bold with your first few edits :D Just i yaya 17:49, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

How write a good article -- Bhatiaji1696 ( talk) 09:43, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @ Bhatiaji1696, see WP:1st if you want to write a new article. Writing a new article can be extremely difficult for beginners so perhaps choosing another WP:Task to do here would be best. Just i yaya 10:00, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

what are semi protected pages -- Expansionlead ( talk) 15:38, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

hello how can i edit semi protected pages -- Expansionlead ( talk) 15:40, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @ Expansionlead, welcome to Wikipedia! Semi-protected pages are pages that new users (and unregistered users) cannot edit, usually because of persistent disruption. If you want to make changes to a semi-protected page, feel free to post the changes you want to make and the page you want it to be made on below and I'll do it for you. Alternatively, you can file an edit request but that process might take a while due to backlog. Just i yaya 17:20, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

I want to edit a photo on one of the pages in WIKIPEDIA Its is not accurate Expansionlead ( talk) 15:55, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

@ Expansionlead What photo (on what article and exactly which one)? Why is it not accurate? Just i yaya 16:32, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

On 14 June 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Topical Dancer, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the album Topical Dancer was created using four different languages? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Topical Dancer. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Topical Dancer), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 —  Amakuru ( talk) 12:02, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your years of service to our encyclopedia! The death of Marie Trintignant & Cantat’s responsibility are clearly notable — & controversial! After reading the Article, the Talk, a bit of a major Ref, and some of the recent edits, it seemed like a good fit to add it to the ShortDesc. But it seems bound to trigger a reversion by someone; if that is you, I will not object. BUT the reverse also, please: if you think it’s a reasonable solution, I would appreciate your keeping track of this BLP skirmish and weighing in as appropriate. Thanks for your consideration! Left Central ( talk) 19:20, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @ Left Central, thanks for leaving a message on my talk page. Although I'm not quite sure why you decided to ask this on my talk page. I'm assuming that you are talking about Special:Diff/1093613739. I'm personally not very familiar with this but my opinion is that "convicted murderer" should not be included, but the rest of the edit looks good. While the death of Marie Trintignant received significant coverage, I believe simplifying the subject to "convinced murder" would leave out the circumstances that surrounds it. Short descriptions should also be generally under 40 characters long. The short description currently is 50 characters, and because the subject is primarly notable for being a musician, he being a convicted murder should be removed from the short description to shorten it. I won't say that the article is involved in skirmishes as I haven't found much edits in the article in the past year nor talk page messages that may suggest so. If you do agree with my points, feel free to leave a message below and I'll change it. If you disagree, leave a message below explaining why. Thanks for your contributions and for reaching out. Happy editing! Just i yaya 06:39, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much! I have little time today and so l need to be crisp. First, I selected you because you are a senior editor who had corrected one obvious improper edit substituting “murderer“ for musician. I agree that the word skirmish in my note is incorrect. It is not a RECENT nasty battle among editors, unlike some other things I have noticed of late. (One example would be “Odessa“ versus Odesa, where rudeness has happened— I’ve stayed out of that: WAY above my pay grade, if you will forgive my using that as a bit of a joke.) Second, I had not studied WP:Description. My bad, and going through that very carefully was quite helpful. Thanks for that, and the alert to 40 being the ideal character count (out of the 90 theoretically permitted). I always work hard on tightening and will be especially cautious on that for Descriptions. Third, I read several more References. As a result of all this, I have come to two opinions: 1) The Article itself needs work. Different Refs use differing terminology on Cantat’s crime. I think our encyclopedia has a BLP problem here, with more research into additional RS’s needed — probably including someone who reads Lithuanian at level 5. 2) This is Notable BLP stuff, I firmly believe now, but controversial and difficult. The suicide of his wife, with allegations beforehand, is especially important in the context of Marie Trintignant’s death. SO: I think it clearly fits into Description-level presentation, but “murderer” was the wrong word. I have therefore changed that to “killer” — which keeps the issue in the correct NPOV perspective, I believe, and is factually correct without ambiguity. (It also cuts 2 characters, which helps a smidgen.) Thanks again (!!!) for taking your time to help me learn and grow as a new editor; I focus heavily on copy editing as my best expertise, and I expect that will be the case for me for a long time to come. (Yesterday, for example, I saw many problems and several opportunities in the Article “J. Michael Luttig,” who spoke to several million people in testifying to the January 6 Select Committee. Since that was getting very high 🌎🌍🌏 readership, I rearranged my schedule so that I could do a fairly thorough copy edit of that article and contributed 10 edits, ranging from trivial to complex and important [I fixed one major error]. That is by far my most intense set of Wikipedia time contributions to date.) Again, thanks for moving me along! Left Central ( talk) 21:04, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Oh, whom should I alert to the inconsistencies in References on Contat’s crime? I do believe that should be investigated and fixed, to eliminate BLP liability. Thx! Left Central ( talk) 21:12, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

I've (partially) reverted to the version I prefer because the new version sounds more unencyclopdic. I don't think your changes adequately addressed the concerns above but is not really worth debating. Regarding the inconsistencies, best to mention them on the article's talk page. Just i yaya 09:01, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

• My contribution is reverted. So I give an link of the HK01, which also reported the Chinese Wikipedia. I will provide the translation later.

"一內地網民偽造大量引用資料　亂寫古俄史條目". HK01. 2022-06-20. Retrieved 2022-06-21.

-- Beta Lohman※ Office box 16:05, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Sure @ Beta Lohman, but I think it's also important to consider audience here, out of the entire press coverage list, (from a cursory glance) there are two non-English sources (including the one you've added) and the articles you linked really doesn't apply much to English Wikipedia. Anyways, please also see the template under the bold "Foreign-language coverage" heading in the section Wikipedia:Press coverage#Adding entries to a page. Just i yaya 16:45, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

I would also like to note that the initial revert was due to the linked article being user generated and not really press coverage. Anyways, thank you for you contributions, happy editing and have a great day :D Just i yaya 16:50, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

• What? I gave the link HK01 just now, and told that I was translating. But you're going to end the dialogue now? I haven't finished yet. -- Beta Lohman※ Office box 16:55, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

So you take the link or don't take? And one more thing, I don't quite agree the part of considering audience. This page is for reading mostly users on Wikipedia. I added the links. That was also because of the same page in 2021. It also mentioned the Chinese Wikipedia. -- Beta Lohman※ Office box 17:01, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

@ Beta Lohman Your edits towards the Wikipedia:Press coverage 2022 does not need to be approved by anyone, being bold is encouraged. Feel free to add the source in the article directly.

It is my opinion that non-English sources or articles covering Wikipedias in other languages should be minimal in WP:Press based on it's usefulness to its audience. The same page in 2021 that you linked has (again, at a cursory glance) zero non-English sources.

If you still want to add the link to the page, feel free to simply do so, I do not think it's worth debating over and if someone else objects, they'd engage in WP:BRD. If you want me to, I'd gladly help with the translation of the heading. Just i yaya 17:35, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

My opinion in the beginning was (is) to translate the titles of the news. But I see you SAID have a great day. I thought that was a hint you're going to end the topic. -- Beta Lohman※ Office box 17:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Go on, it shall be only English at the page. News about Chinese Wikipedia should be at another page of the Chinese version. But I see the some news also reported things about Chinese Wikipedia at the page in 2021. That was why I added links on there. I will find another way to keep or delete. -- Beta Lohman※ Office box 17:53, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Responded at Wikipedia talk:Press coverage 2022#News about Chinese Wikipedia Just i yaya 18:24, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

• Again, I demand to remove my name on the edit summary. -- Beta Lohman※ Office box 19:48, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

• please read revision deletion and criteria for redaction, though I would not advise that you request it as while technically possible, the request would likely not be pursuant to policy Just i yaya 04:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

  You made this trouble. How could you just say "advising"? No matter how the guideline is, you always have to do apply for deletion. -- Beta Lohman※ Office box 22:12, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

  You have no control over the edit summaries of other Wikipedians. –– FormalDude talk 22:27, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

This is Justiyaya's mistake. I asked him to remove the name of the edit summary, which is also not a control or something, but a delete permission for admin actions. I followed the privacy request to remove it. Also, if you don't understand the course of events, I don't think you're in a position to intervene in this matter.-- Beta Lohman※ Office box 00:11, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

@ Beta Lohman: Your username is not private. –– FormalDude talk 00:23, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

I have a valid reason to request removal. I'm not going to take your word for this. -- Beta Lohman※ Office box 00:30, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

No, you do not have a valid reason, and I suggest you stop pursuing the matter. –– FormalDude talk 00:30, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Beta Lohman, I do need to make clear that there's no reason for another user to remove something from an edit summary unless it's actually grossly damaging to Wikipedia or its reputation, or poses a real-life threat to someone else - see WP:CRD as listed above by Justiyaya. Simply stating a user or IP address in a reversion edit summary is routine practice.

Your username is not at all private as said by FormalDude; your privacy is not in danger. Justiyaya made no mistake and RevDel criteria don't apply here. Admins would therefore not consider such requests. I understand I'm not directly involved in this discussion, and please do forgive me for so rudely butting in, but we do need you to understand the matter here. Thanks, Liamyangll ( talk to me!) 11:48, 24 June 2022 (UTC) ( talk page watcher)

• @ Justiyaya: Why didn't you respond further? I see you're so impolite. -- Beta Lohman※ Office box 19:25, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

  My talk page stalkers already did, I would've said what is basically the same thing. Just i yaya 20:46, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

  Beta Lohman, apart from avoiding redundancy, Justiyaya has no obligation to reply to you (see WP:VOLUNTEER). Please refrain from making personal attacks; see talk page guidelines. Liamyangll ( talk to me!) 02:10, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

That's not the proper attitude. Assume someone could call one's name in the edit summary by adding he's a scum or something, there would be no need to delete it? Besides, about obligation. Anyone should answer in a talk page, it's a matter of basic politeness. -- Beta Lohman※ Office box 02:15, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Even personal attacks aren't usually RevDel'd unless it was grossly inappropriate. The policy page states that RevisionDelete should not be used without prior clear consensus for "ordinary" incivility, attacks, or claims of editorial misconduct. Your name was merely stated without further comment about you; there's no reason to delete it. I do agree that users should strive to respond timely on talk pages, but you really aren't obligated to do so if you don't want to. Liamyangll ( talk to me!) 02:30, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Marjorie Taylor Greene on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:31, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Why do my edits get deleted or taken down -- Lf2000adp ( talk) 23:48, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

@ Lf2000adp Your edits are very clearly vandalism, if you wish to contribute positively to Wikipedia, please go through WP:Introduction and choose a task at our task center. Just i yaya 06:17, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I am the translator of Deportation of Chinese in the Soviet Union, which is now under deletion review due to User:折毛's hoax. Although the English version differed from the Chinese version created by 折毛 from the very beginning, it contained English translation of the Chinese content created by 折毛. To eliminate the impact of her content, I have validated the sources and removed all sources if they are unverifiable. Also, I have added new content backed by new reliable sources. I am thankful for your participation in the previous discussion of the deletion review, but now that the deletion review is not being relisted, I am not sure whether you might want to take a look at the new, mostly re-written, and validated version of the article and express your opinion in the deletion review. I will be most grateful to your further comment regarding any potential improvement of the article and regarding your decision in the deletion review.

--- HNlander ( talk) 16:56, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi Justiyaya, I have been asked to create a page for some history of a local Forest Reserve in our city, and community actions to ensure its preservation. We have quite a lot of source material, and the Forest Reserve has been reported on by government, research, media, and the local community over a number of years. I would like to create a page for this reserve. -- Malaysian Forest Chronicler ( talk) 15:01, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @ Malaysian Forest Chronicler, thanks for asking a question and welcome to Wikipedia. It seems like you might have a conflict of interest with the subject. Please first go through Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide as it provides quite a good explanation of the basic policies surrounding such. Afterwards, please skim through Help:Your first article and optionally, go through our WP:Introduction. Help:Your first article goes through basic policies about writing new articles and WP:Introduction gives a more in depth look at our policies and guidelines. Please skim through the notability guideline for organizations and make sure the your organization satisfies that guideline. Finally, start a draft using our Wikipedia:Article_wizard, it runs through important guidelines (again) and guides you to creating a draft article. When you are ready, submit the draft and a reviewer will look at it and decide to publish or send it back to you for feedback. Feel free to ask any additional questions here. Just i yaya 15:22, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt reply Justiyaya.

I have read the conflict of interest material. Can you please explain further why we might have a conflict of interest? I am helping out a community non profit organisation. But our intention is not to write about that organisation directly. Over the decades, many people have acted to use and protect the forest area as a reserve. Initially government people formed and managed the reserve, and later local community people have sought to ensure its retention and preservation as a forest reserve. Some of these are individuals, and some belong to community non profit groups.

Our goal is to provide an encyclopaedic resource of material about the forest reserve, including its natural resources and landscape, the community sectors that use the area, and also the actions that have been taken over decades to preserve the forest as a reserve.

Regarding notability, the Forest Reserve has been reported on by government, research, media, and the local community over a number of years. It is a widely used community resource, used by many people for recreation, part of the reserve provides urban water supply catchment, and another part hosts a botanic gardens. The land is a gazetted forest reserve under the State Government, and provides a resource for the wider community.

Thanks for your time on this, MFC Malaysian Forest Chronicler ( talk) 15:45, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

@ Malaysian Forest Chronicler What is the title of the page you intend to write? What are you referring to when you say "we"? If you are being paid in any way by the organization you are writing an article for, that is paid editing and needs to be disclosed. If you are not paid, it is extremely likely that you hold an external relationship that may undermine "furthering the interests of the encyclopedia" outlined on WP:EXTERNALREL, and you are expected (not required) to disclose it. This section gives quite clear guidance on disclosing conflicts of interests. If you are sure that your organization meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines, you can move on to the next step, after you have either disclosed a conflict of interest or concluded that you don't have one that needs to be disclosed. Just i yaya 17:03, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Justiyaya, Thank you for your reply.

I appreciate the importance of the wikipedia support pages, and have tried to explore them. It is quite extensive, and indicates Wikipedia's values, which we support. However, while we are clear about our integrity in this matter, in the end, the decision to publish will rest with Wikipedia. We wish to be sure that our work, which will be quite time consuming, is able to be published in the end. The support pages do give guidance, but in the end we are left uncertain about how Wikipedia will interpret our position.

I have included some background which may answer your queries. I initially thought we would be required to provide this information when lodging the page for review. I would appreciate your candor if you consider our use of Wikipedia is likely to be inappropriate.

Our page is to be about Bukit Cherakah Forest Reserve (BCFR) (Cherakah Hill Forest Reserve) in Kuala Lumpur. BCFR began as a 20,000 acre forest reserve, and is now 1,000 acres. But it remains a significant part of the urban landscape, and community recreation areas.

Shah Alam Community Forest Society (SACFS), is an NGO that was established in about 2016, to try and prevent the loss (by the government) of a part of the Forest Reserve, which they call Shah Alam Community Forest (SACF). So this is an advocacy group, advocacy to the community about forest values, and advocacy to the government about the benefits of retaining this part of the forest. The remainder of BCFR is not threatened, being partly water supply catchment for a dam, and partly botanic gardens. SACFS has been partly funded by UNDP (United Nations Development Fund) to further their work, mainly through hiring people and supporting volunteers in studying the forest, and for advocacy.

As part of its research, SACFS has uncovered early historical materials, government reports, and previous studies undertaken. To this they have added survey results from wildlife, flora and landscape studies of the forest organised by SACFS. Many of these materials required significant effort, largely by volunteers, to locate and understand. Though government materials are public documents, they are often difficult to obtain.

As there is no other repository of information on BCFR, SACFS considered it worthy to produce an encyclopaedic record, and bibliography, based on these materials from the public record, to ensure the knowledge is retained for future reference. It is possible that in a few years time SACFS no longer exists. Perhaps SACF will not exist either. Naturally Wikipedia came to SACFS' mind, as they wish to produce a reputable inventory of knowledge about BCFR. It is not intended to produce an advocacy piece - that has been done in other avenues.

I am to be paid a fee for my work, though at community worker rates.

In the past I have done paid and volunteer work for SACFS, mostly in providing maps of the forest, its trails and terrain, to understand the landscape, and to assist ecological field surveys.

Apart from payment for this job, and for recent mapping work, my relationship with SACFS, and BCFR is of a professional cartographer and landscape ecologist, who studies urban forest patches, teaches about their values, and uses them to teach environmental science, and advocates for their retention as community assets. To this end, I support the work of SACFS.

Thank you for your time on this matter. I appreciate that you are also probably acting in a voluntary capacity. Malaysian Forest Chronicler ( talk) 21:00, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

@ Malaysian Forest Chronicler Thanks for writing all that, whether Wikipedia would accept your article mainly comes down to having multiple independent, reliable secondary sources providing significant coverage to the organization you are writing for. Wikipedia is interested in what the reliable secondary sources say about the organization, not really what the organization says about themselves.

It appears that you have already started a draft at User:Malaysian Forest Chronicler/sandbox, it's sometimes helpful to look at articles for similar organizations when writing. After you have written a draft, a reviewer will look at it and decide to publish it or not. Please keep the use of primary sources (sources written by your organization) at a minimum and rely primary on secondary sources (sources written by independent news organizations). At this point it is probably best that you write the article, submit, and wait for feedback if you believe the subject is notable.

You only needed to disclose if you are being paid to edit (which you are), and who paid you to do so. Putting this template on your userpage would be sufficient:

{{paid|employer=Bukit Cherakah Forest Reserve (or if another organization paid you, replace this with that organization)}}

Good luck on writing your article, feel free to ask additional questions here. Just i yaya 03:40, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I just made some significant changes to User:Terasail/Edit Request Tool. Since you have the tool active, I am informing you of this since it may affect you. To open the tool you will now have to click the "respond" button. The tool will load a similar interface as before. There is now a live preview of the response. These changes might have introduced some bugs so if you have any concerns / suggestions or run into problems please leave a note at User talk:Terasail/Edit Request Tool Thanks, Terasail ^[✉️] 15:37, 30 June 2022 (UTC)