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 35 | ← | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | Archive 42 | Archive 43 | → | Archive 45 |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).
Tony, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Moaia/Archive (re edits to remove "Common" at Tourette syndrome). Kijatta did it, Moaia did it, and a new editor is back with same. [1] [2] Does this necessitate a new SPI, or is it a DUCK situation? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:29, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
For the lead purposes, common is common; explained in the body of the article. [3] Also @ Bbb23 and Drmies:; can I just start reverting on sight, and pinging one of you? Suggestions? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 21:36, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
...on whether blocking 2600:1009:B04F:7647:D563:D752:DB2B:604/32 is too big. If you check you'll see why I'm tempted to do so. If you think this is feasible, please go for it. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 22:18, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello there! “All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic.” Now in the ‘Tiger versus Lion’ article on wiki, a lot of accounts for the tiger killing lion have been added by a user named BritishTiger, and he also removed some accounts of the lion killing tiger without any explanation. That “In captivity” section in ‘Observed fights’ is completely vandalised. Some unreliable accounts are there too, please help mate! KejuFuru ( talk) 06:35, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
I completely agree with you! Look at this account in the ‘Observed fights: in captivity“ section for example, “In 1924 a tiger owned by Mabel Stark killed 2 lions and 2 tigers.” This is crap sourcing, and there are so many accounts like this. Also the user who added this (BritishTiger) removed some reliable accounts from the section without any explanation in the edit summary. He even got blocked for it earlier but he didn’t learn. I’ll give you more accounts like this when I get some time, till then please remove the account I mentioned and maybe remove some other ones you find as unreliable or badly sourced. Thanks for understanding! KejuFuru ( talk) 06:55, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
I had this user's talkpage on my watchlist after having reported them to ANEW a few months ago. Am I correct in guessing this is a BKFIP-related block? Grandpallama ( talk) 18:02, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi Tony! I hope you are doing well. I just had a quick question regarding a user revealing their personal email account in a talk page thread (specifically here). What should I do if I notice a user do this under such circumstances? Is contacting an administrator to get the information wiped as soon as possible the proper course of action? If so, is there a proper noticeboard for such things? Thanks, Tyrone Madera ( talk) 17:35, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Io, Saturnalia! | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth ( talk) 15:10, 17 December 2021 (UTC) |
Holiday cheer | ||
Here is a snowman a gift a boar's head and something blue for your listening pleasure. Enjoy and have a wonderful 2022 TB. MarnetteD| Talk 02:56, 19 December 2021 (UTC) |
Tony,
I sincerely hope your holiday season goes well this year especially with what we went through last year. I'm optimistic that 2022 will be a better year for all of us: both in real life and on Wikipedia. Wishing you the best from,
Interstellarity (
talk) 19:02, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello, TonyBallioni! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU
(T) 19:57, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Dear Tony,
You've always been a hero for me at SPI. I can't overstate how much I appreciate the hard work you do there, a thankless task it often seems. And so I hate to bother you on the holidays, but I've got a question to ask about something that's really been bugging me lately:
Are there any formally compiled statistics available on the number of SPI cases that are filed, yearly?
I haven't been able to find anything on Wikipedia. I've searched the web but could only find secondary sources that give uncited figures for certain years. For example, a quote from Case Study of Sockpuppet Detection on Wikipedia":
"Sockpuppets are a prevalent problem in Wikipedia, there were close to 2,700 unique suspected cases reported in 2012. "
This is helpful, but I can't find any facts on the number of sockpuppets investigated/confirmed for 2014, 2018, or 2020, etc. Are stats like this even formally collected and disseminated?
If so, I would greatly appreciate knowing where to find them. If not, I am deeply troubled that Wikipedia doesn't keep up-to-date statistics about how many cases are processed every year, given the apparent extent of the problem. You deserve better than that for your hard work.
Thanks for your time, and I hope you have a great new year.
P.S.: I am aware of
this SPI archive, but it dates back to the 2000s and seems inactive, and not very quantitative. To clarify, I'm looking for more recent figures, rather than a list of cases.
Hunan201p (
talk) 16:05, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Nicely done, thanks. Restores my faith. A bit. - Dank ( push to talk) 17:47, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2022! | |
Hello TonyBallioni, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2022. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
These have failed in two dimensions. First, our articles are a mess and have been for a long time. We are losing to organized nationalist manipulation. Second, good editors like Ealdgyth have been driven away out of frustration. ArbCom need to step in, identify the worst offenders, and ban them. AE can clean up the rest once the tag teaming is disabled. I’m commenting here because I’ve reached my word limit. Maybe I’ll change your mind but it’s okay if you don’t agree. Thank you for reading. Jehochman Talk 03:28, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Please stop disrupting my attempts to speak with Tony about a different topic. I did not come here to speak with you. Jehochman Talk 05:05, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
This is not really a subject I feel comfortable talking on because of all of the real life impact this topic area has had on editors. VM and GCB are inferring threats because throwing up the spectre of the media to intimidate people is a tactic Icewhiz has used in the past, and he is self-revealed to have had made appearances in media outlets before. It makes people nervous when it keeps being repeated because someone who is associated with a lot of real life pain would frequently talk in a similar way. I don't think anyone is saying you're collaborating or anything, but this is a topic where people walk on eggshells in part because of the media concern. TonyBallioni ( talk) 18:21, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi, hope you're having a nice holiday season. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it would seem to me that the first sentence in the bulleted list at the AN RFA2021 close might need extra punctuation somewhere. Perhaps a period after the bold part? Great close otherwise. Enterprisey ( talk!) 06:38, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Apologies if I'm going about this the wrong way. I have limited experience with edit warring. I saw that you have dealt with Walter Gorlitz's edit warring in the past, and thought I should let you know that he is at it again on Steve Terreberry. He reverted the same two associated acts three times on 29 and 30 December. [10] I also see an uncivil exchange between he and the other editor on their respective talk pages. Instant Comma ( talk) 14:54, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Season's greetings and Merry Christmas to you and your family. Have a wonderful holiday season. Cheers! RV ( talk) 03:01, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
Hi!
You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.
Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.
If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.
We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.
Thank you. / Johan (WMF)
18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm going to guess that what you were trying to fix was the "there is an RFA" banner? There is a bot that updates the count for that, sometimes it lags a bit. If there is something else broken please let me know! — xaosflux Talk 14:25, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
That quote from a recent edit summary truly made my day. I mean, the whole page did, but especially that. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 01:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Greetings TonyBallioni. I am appealing directly to your good sense and judgement (always better in hindsight) to request that you amend your
Bold/IAR closure of this Administrative action review. The basis of my direct appeal is three fold, as follows:
1.) Because best practice requires that I begin any endeavor to challenge a formal closure by attempting first to resolve the matter on the talk page of the person who performed the closure, and:
2.) Because I desire redress and hope to achieve satisfaction without having to advance a formal challenge at wp:an, and:
3.) Most importantly, because I believe that we can resolve this matter without compulsory need if we remain collegial with Wikipedia's best interest as our core motivation. This, necessarily, means that I am approaching you, in appeal, with a willing mindset to accept your rebuttal if the rationale proves to be sufficiently compelling.
Before enumerating specific grounds, I like to simply ask, less formally, that you either reclose the discussion yourself, based only on your evaluation of the discussion being closed in accordance with the spirit of XRV purpose, without injecting any involved opinion, and without any predisposition or external influence, or, if you can not do the former in good faith, reopen the discussion and allow another uninvolved admin to perform the closure. Are either of these something that you would be willing to do? Because doing either would completely resolve the matter regarding my dissatisfaction of the original closure. I am keen to see your reply, and remain in respect for you.--
John Cline (
talk) 21:53, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello TonyBallioni,
Given your early involvement in WP:BILATERAL, I wanted to point you towards a RfC on the topic of renaming bilateral relations articles. If you'd like to participate, please see the discussion page. Best, Pilaz ( talk) 02:41, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
In a process that began last year with WP:DS2021, the Arbitration Committee is evaluating Discretionary Sanctions (DS) in order to improve it. A larger package of reforms is slated for sometime this year. From the work done so far, it became clear a number of areas may no longer need DS or that some DS areas may be overly broad.
The topics proposed for revocation are:
The topics proposed for a rewording of what is covered under DS are:
Additionally any Article probation topics not already revoked are proposed for revocation.
Community feedback is invited and welcome at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. -- Barkeep49 ( talk) 16:59, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
In a process that began last year with WP:DS2021, the Arbitration Committee is evaluating Discretionary Sanctions (DS) in order to improve it. A larger package of reforms is slated for sometime this year. From the work done so far, it became clear a number of areas may no longer need DS or that some DS areas may be overly broad.
The topics proposed for revocation are:
The topics proposed for a rewording of what is covered under DS are:
Additionally any Article probation topics not already revoked are proposed for revocation.
Community feedback is invited and welcome at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. -- Barkeep49 ( talk) 04:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).
oversight
will be renamed suppress
in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for
technical reasons. You can comment
in Phabricator if you have objections.A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of MangoTareeface9 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkl talk 19:48, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if you would be willing to reduce the protection on Bitfinex. It's currently at ECP, and it probably should be at semi-. The page was protected almost 4 years ago, and the article has not had very many edits to it in the past 2 years. Thanks! SWinxy ( talk) 00:26, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.
Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).
|
|
Hi, would you please categorize their socks? — Jeff G. ツ 18:01, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
YGM.. — xaosflux Talk 00:22, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Tony Ballioni, On August 11, 2019 you gave me new page reviewer rights. I am no longer interested in reviewing new pages, please could you remove my membership from the NPP group. Best wishes, Polyamorph ( talk) 08:40, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Tony, sorry to disturb you. At the moment, and for the foreseeable future, I'm taking long-distance trains multiple times a week, and the IPs from the wifi that you get on the trains are banned. Would you be able to do the trick for my account so I'm not affected by that so I can edit during these long journeys? Otherwise, I'll have to find less-productive ways to procrastinate :) Dr. Vogel ( talk) 12:42, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Tony,
I saw your name, on a list or a page history, and realized I hadn't seen your work in a few months. I hope the "busyness" of your off-line life isn't stressful and that you are getting your batteries recharged. I look forward to running into you around the project when life permits more of a return. Maybe you could spend more time doing "fun stuff" like you probably did when you started editing rather than the adminning work that makes you silently cry out "ARRRGHH!!". All the best, Liz Read! Talk! 21:21, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).
deletelogentry
and deletedhistory
rights. This means that those in the
Researcher user group and
Checkusers who are not administrators can now access
Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (
T301928)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 35 | ← | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | Archive 42 | Archive 43 | → | Archive 45 |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).
Tony, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Moaia/Archive (re edits to remove "Common" at Tourette syndrome). Kijatta did it, Moaia did it, and a new editor is back with same. [1] [2] Does this necessitate a new SPI, or is it a DUCK situation? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:29, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
For the lead purposes, common is common; explained in the body of the article. [3] Also @ Bbb23 and Drmies:; can I just start reverting on sight, and pinging one of you? Suggestions? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 21:36, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
...on whether blocking 2600:1009:B04F:7647:D563:D752:DB2B:604/32 is too big. If you check you'll see why I'm tempted to do so. If you think this is feasible, please go for it. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 22:18, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello there! “All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic.” Now in the ‘Tiger versus Lion’ article on wiki, a lot of accounts for the tiger killing lion have been added by a user named BritishTiger, and he also removed some accounts of the lion killing tiger without any explanation. That “In captivity” section in ‘Observed fights’ is completely vandalised. Some unreliable accounts are there too, please help mate! KejuFuru ( talk) 06:35, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
I completely agree with you! Look at this account in the ‘Observed fights: in captivity“ section for example, “In 1924 a tiger owned by Mabel Stark killed 2 lions and 2 tigers.” This is crap sourcing, and there are so many accounts like this. Also the user who added this (BritishTiger) removed some reliable accounts from the section without any explanation in the edit summary. He even got blocked for it earlier but he didn’t learn. I’ll give you more accounts like this when I get some time, till then please remove the account I mentioned and maybe remove some other ones you find as unreliable or badly sourced. Thanks for understanding! KejuFuru ( talk) 06:55, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
I had this user's talkpage on my watchlist after having reported them to ANEW a few months ago. Am I correct in guessing this is a BKFIP-related block? Grandpallama ( talk) 18:02, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi Tony! I hope you are doing well. I just had a quick question regarding a user revealing their personal email account in a talk page thread (specifically here). What should I do if I notice a user do this under such circumstances? Is contacting an administrator to get the information wiped as soon as possible the proper course of action? If so, is there a proper noticeboard for such things? Thanks, Tyrone Madera ( talk) 17:35, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Io, Saturnalia! | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth ( talk) 15:10, 17 December 2021 (UTC) |
Holiday cheer | ||
Here is a snowman a gift a boar's head and something blue for your listening pleasure. Enjoy and have a wonderful 2022 TB. MarnetteD| Talk 02:56, 19 December 2021 (UTC) |
Tony,
I sincerely hope your holiday season goes well this year especially with what we went through last year. I'm optimistic that 2022 will be a better year for all of us: both in real life and on Wikipedia. Wishing you the best from,
Interstellarity (
talk) 19:02, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
Hello, TonyBallioni! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU
(T) 19:57, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Dear Tony,
You've always been a hero for me at SPI. I can't overstate how much I appreciate the hard work you do there, a thankless task it often seems. And so I hate to bother you on the holidays, but I've got a question to ask about something that's really been bugging me lately:
Are there any formally compiled statistics available on the number of SPI cases that are filed, yearly?
I haven't been able to find anything on Wikipedia. I've searched the web but could only find secondary sources that give uncited figures for certain years. For example, a quote from Case Study of Sockpuppet Detection on Wikipedia":
"Sockpuppets are a prevalent problem in Wikipedia, there were close to 2,700 unique suspected cases reported in 2012. "
This is helpful, but I can't find any facts on the number of sockpuppets investigated/confirmed for 2014, 2018, or 2020, etc. Are stats like this even formally collected and disseminated?
If so, I would greatly appreciate knowing where to find them. If not, I am deeply troubled that Wikipedia doesn't keep up-to-date statistics about how many cases are processed every year, given the apparent extent of the problem. You deserve better than that for your hard work.
Thanks for your time, and I hope you have a great new year.
P.S.: I am aware of
this SPI archive, but it dates back to the 2000s and seems inactive, and not very quantitative. To clarify, I'm looking for more recent figures, rather than a list of cases.
Hunan201p (
talk) 16:05, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Nicely done, thanks. Restores my faith. A bit. - Dank ( push to talk) 17:47, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2022! | |
Hello TonyBallioni, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this
seasonal occasion. Spread the
WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2022. Spread the love by adding {{ subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages. |
These have failed in two dimensions. First, our articles are a mess and have been for a long time. We are losing to organized nationalist manipulation. Second, good editors like Ealdgyth have been driven away out of frustration. ArbCom need to step in, identify the worst offenders, and ban them. AE can clean up the rest once the tag teaming is disabled. I’m commenting here because I’ve reached my word limit. Maybe I’ll change your mind but it’s okay if you don’t agree. Thank you for reading. Jehochman Talk 03:28, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Please stop disrupting my attempts to speak with Tony about a different topic. I did not come here to speak with you. Jehochman Talk 05:05, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
This is not really a subject I feel comfortable talking on because of all of the real life impact this topic area has had on editors. VM and GCB are inferring threats because throwing up the spectre of the media to intimidate people is a tactic Icewhiz has used in the past, and he is self-revealed to have had made appearances in media outlets before. It makes people nervous when it keeps being repeated because someone who is associated with a lot of real life pain would frequently talk in a similar way. I don't think anyone is saying you're collaborating or anything, but this is a topic where people walk on eggshells in part because of the media concern. TonyBallioni ( talk) 18:21, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi, hope you're having a nice holiday season. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it would seem to me that the first sentence in the bulleted list at the AN RFA2021 close might need extra punctuation somewhere. Perhaps a period after the bold part? Great close otherwise. Enterprisey ( talk!) 06:38, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Apologies if I'm going about this the wrong way. I have limited experience with edit warring. I saw that you have dealt with Walter Gorlitz's edit warring in the past, and thought I should let you know that he is at it again on Steve Terreberry. He reverted the same two associated acts three times on 29 and 30 December. [10] I also see an uncivil exchange between he and the other editor on their respective talk pages. Instant Comma ( talk) 14:54, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Season's greetings and Merry Christmas to you and your family. Have a wonderful holiday season. Cheers! RV ( talk) 03:01, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).
Interface administrator changes
|
|
Hi!
You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.
Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.
If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.
We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.
Thank you. / Johan (WMF)
18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm going to guess that what you were trying to fix was the "there is an RFA" banner? There is a bot that updates the count for that, sometimes it lags a bit. If there is something else broken please let me know! — xaosflux Talk 14:25, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
That quote from a recent edit summary truly made my day. I mean, the whole page did, but especially that. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 01:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Greetings TonyBallioni. I am appealing directly to your good sense and judgement (always better in hindsight) to request that you amend your
Bold/IAR closure of this Administrative action review. The basis of my direct appeal is three fold, as follows:
1.) Because best practice requires that I begin any endeavor to challenge a formal closure by attempting first to resolve the matter on the talk page of the person who performed the closure, and:
2.) Because I desire redress and hope to achieve satisfaction without having to advance a formal challenge at wp:an, and:
3.) Most importantly, because I believe that we can resolve this matter without compulsory need if we remain collegial with Wikipedia's best interest as our core motivation. This, necessarily, means that I am approaching you, in appeal, with a willing mindset to accept your rebuttal if the rationale proves to be sufficiently compelling.
Before enumerating specific grounds, I like to simply ask, less formally, that you either reclose the discussion yourself, based only on your evaluation of the discussion being closed in accordance with the spirit of XRV purpose, without injecting any involved opinion, and without any predisposition or external influence, or, if you can not do the former in good faith, reopen the discussion and allow another uninvolved admin to perform the closure. Are either of these something that you would be willing to do? Because doing either would completely resolve the matter regarding my dissatisfaction of the original closure. I am keen to see your reply, and remain in respect for you.--
John Cline (
talk) 21:53, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello TonyBallioni,
Given your early involvement in WP:BILATERAL, I wanted to point you towards a RfC on the topic of renaming bilateral relations articles. If you'd like to participate, please see the discussion page. Best, Pilaz ( talk) 02:41, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
In a process that began last year with WP:DS2021, the Arbitration Committee is evaluating Discretionary Sanctions (DS) in order to improve it. A larger package of reforms is slated for sometime this year. From the work done so far, it became clear a number of areas may no longer need DS or that some DS areas may be overly broad.
The topics proposed for revocation are:
The topics proposed for a rewording of what is covered under DS are:
Additionally any Article probation topics not already revoked are proposed for revocation.
Community feedback is invited and welcome at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. -- Barkeep49 ( talk) 16:59, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
In a process that began last year with WP:DS2021, the Arbitration Committee is evaluating Discretionary Sanctions (DS) in order to improve it. A larger package of reforms is slated for sometime this year. From the work done so far, it became clear a number of areas may no longer need DS or that some DS areas may be overly broad.
The topics proposed for revocation are:
The topics proposed for a rewording of what is covered under DS are:
Additionally any Article probation topics not already revoked are proposed for revocation.
Community feedback is invited and welcome at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions. -- Barkeep49 ( talk) 04:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).
oversight
will be renamed suppress
in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for
technical reasons. You can comment
in Phabricator if you have objections.A tag has been placed on Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of MangoTareeface9 indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Qwerfjkl talk 19:48, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if you would be willing to reduce the protection on Bitfinex. It's currently at ECP, and it probably should be at semi-. The page was protected almost 4 years ago, and the article has not had very many edits to it in the past 2 years. Thanks! SWinxy ( talk) 00:26, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello! I wanted to drop a quick note for all of our AFC participants; nothing huge and fancy like a newsletter, but a few points of interest.
Short and sweet, but there's always more to discuss at WT:AFC. Stop on by, maybe review a draft on the way? Whether you're one of our top reviewers, or haven't reviewed in a while, I want to thank you for helping out in the past and in the future. Cheers, Primefac, via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:00, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).
|
|
Hi, would you please categorize their socks? — Jeff G. ツ 18:01, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
YGM.. — xaosflux Talk 00:22, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Tony Ballioni, On August 11, 2019 you gave me new page reviewer rights. I am no longer interested in reviewing new pages, please could you remove my membership from the NPP group. Best wishes, Polyamorph ( talk) 08:40, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi Tony, sorry to disturb you. At the moment, and for the foreseeable future, I'm taking long-distance trains multiple times a week, and the IPs from the wifi that you get on the trains are banned. Would you be able to do the trick for my account so I'm not affected by that so I can edit during these long journeys? Otherwise, I'll have to find less-productive ways to procrastinate :) Dr. Vogel ( talk) 12:42, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Tony,
I saw your name, on a list or a page history, and realized I hadn't seen your work in a few months. I hope the "busyness" of your off-line life isn't stressful and that you are getting your batteries recharged. I look forward to running into you around the project when life permits more of a return. Maybe you could spend more time doing "fun stuff" like you probably did when you started editing rather than the adminning work that makes you silently cry out "ARRRGHH!!". All the best, Liz Read! Talk! 21:21, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).
deletelogentry
and deletedhistory
rights. This means that those in the
Researcher user group and
Checkusers who are not administrators can now access
Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (
T301928)