User talk:28bytes/Archive 58
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:28bytes. 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 55 | Archive 56 | Archive 57 | Archive 58 |
RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins
Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:
- Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
- Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
- Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
- Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
- Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
- Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
- Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
- Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed
See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 May 2024
- News and notes: Democracy in action: multiple elections
- Special report: Will the new RfA reform come to the rescue of administrators?
- Arbitration report: Ruined temples for posterity to ponder over – arbitration from '22 to '24
- Comix: Generations
- Traffic report: Crawl out through the fallout, baby
May music
 | |
| story · music · places |
|---|
Today's story mentions a concert I loved to hear (DYK) and a piece I loved to sing in choir, 150 years old (OTD). -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:51, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Today's story is about Samuel Kummer, one of five items on the Main page - more musing on my talk --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:32, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
last offer in May: photos of the river Rhine, and the adjacent Eltville rose garden, - high water and interesting weather --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:20, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Numberguy6
As this was the first running of an experimental RfA, I'm not sure that less than 3 hours was enough time to see how it would pan out. I would say that the candidate hasn't presented themselves well, and, as it stood at the point you closed it, I would have opposed; however, it might be the case that under this experimental system that a lot more objections would surface early on. Or that when a candidate can see how their behaviour is giving concern that they may start making amends that will cause people to start supporting. We just don't know. SilkTork (talk) 07:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hi SilkTork. Fair point on the 3 hours. It was around 1:00 AM my time when I saw the RfA, and if there hadn’t been over 20 opposes already, I would have just gone to bed and looked in on it again in the morning. But seeing the numbers where they stood, I felt like the chances were very low that the result would be anything other than the guy getting beaten up for another 8 hours with hurt feelings on all sides and questions about where the ’crats were and why no one did anything to stop it, much like in last month’s RfA, which was halted at 0/0/0. Realistically I don’t see how this RfA could have succeeded, and I feel like letting the oppose count get up to 30 or 40 before calling it off would have done a disservice to the candidate, but I’m certainly open to the idea that I’ve misjudged it. 28bytes (talk) 07:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- In cases like this it comes down to a judgement call, which you made as you saw it, and I don't see any real advantage to re-opening it, but I'm thinking that moving forward more information may be gathered if an experimental RfA is left to unfold a little longer. Just between you and me (and your talkpage watchers) when I saw that RfA in its early stages I wanted to put an end to it because it was clear that the candidate was not the most appropriate one to be trialling the new process because of their unusually limited approach to communication. I feel sure they would have failed under the traditional RfA, but they might have gathered more support early on which might have led to a more balanced discussion. Perhaps this is indicating that the new system is quicker at highlighting a candidate's weaknesses. SilkTork (talk) 08:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- All good points. Another thought I had was that it would be nice if people “held their fire” on additional opposes once there were 15 or 20 opposes already (in cases of <10 supports) so that things could run a little longer without fear of a pile-on. But then again, we’re already asking them to wait 2 days before opposing, so that’s probably not realistic either. 28bytes (talk) 09:06, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- My anecdotal observation of various polls or consumer reviews is that when a trend starts, a pile on follows. I guess we are communal animals, and there is something instinctively reassuring about following the herd and being part of the pack. Emotions are infectious - laughter, fear, joy, anger, etc - it's difficult to remain aloof from these emotions when they are swelling around us. Intellectually someone can think: "This doesn't need my oppose/support", but emotionally they get gripped by the moment, and want to be seen as part of the community. Especially as on Wikipedia we put a deal of weight on being part of the community. SilkTork (talk) 10:31, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- All good points. Another thought I had was that it would be nice if people “held their fire” on additional opposes once there were 15 or 20 opposes already (in cases of <10 supports) so that things could run a little longer without fear of a pile-on. But then again, we’re already asking them to wait 2 days before opposing, so that’s probably not realistic either. 28bytes (talk) 09:06, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- In cases like this it comes down to a judgement call, which you made as you saw it, and I don't see any real advantage to re-opening it, but I'm thinking that moving forward more information may be gathered if an experimental RfA is left to unfold a little longer. Just between you and me (and your talkpage watchers) when I saw that RfA in its early stages I wanted to put an end to it because it was clear that the candidate was not the most appropriate one to be trialling the new process because of their unusually limited approach to communication. I feel sure they would have failed under the traditional RfA, but they might have gathered more support early on which might have led to a more balanced discussion. Perhaps this is indicating that the new system is quicker at highlighting a candidate's weaknesses. SilkTork (talk) 08:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).
Administrator changes
Bureaucrat changes
Guideline and policy news
- Phase II of the 2024 RfA review has commenced to improve and refine the proposals passed in Phase I.
Technical news
- The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351
Arbitration
- The arbitration case Venezuelan politics has been closed.
- The Committee is seeking volunteers for various roles, including access to the conflict of interest VRT queue.
Miscellaneous
- WikiProject Reliability's unsourced statements drive is happening in June 2024 to replace {{citation needed}} tags with references! Sign up here to participate!
The Signpost: 8 June 2024
- Technology report: New Page Patrol receives a much-needed software upgrade
- Deletion report: The lore of Kalloor
- In the media: National cable networks get in on the action arguing about what the first sentence of a Wikipedia article ought to say
- News from the WMF: Progress on the plan — how the Wikimedia Foundation advanced on its Annual Plan goals during the first half of fiscal year 2023-2024
- Recent research: ChatGPT did not kill Wikipedia, but might have reduced its growth
- Featured content: We didn't start the wiki
- Essay: No queerphobia
- Special report: RetractionBot is back to life!
- Traffic report: Chimps, Eurovision, and the return of the Baby Reindeer
- Comix: The Wikipediholic Family
- Concept: Palimpsestuous
Un-redirect userpage to talk page
Around a year ago, I redirected my userpage to my talk page, according to WP:UP , to get rid of the red font that my username would appear in every time I made an edit. However, I discovered today the joy of user boxes and am interested in making a userpage. I can't seem to figure out how to un-redirect my userpage to my talk page, however. So, I searched up active admins and your username popped out the most to me so I'm here asking you this question. Thanks! InfiniteSword (talk) 04:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
Done. Happy editing! 28bytes (talk) 12:09, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Just out of curiosity, how did you end up doing it? Also, is there a way to change it so that only autoconfirmed users can edit the page? You know, to avoid vandalism and stuff. InfiniteSword (talk) 16:26, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- When you open a page that’s been redirected, there’s a line right under “From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia” that says “(Redirected from such-and-such)”. Click on the such-and-such link and it will let you edit the page and replace the #REDIRECT with whatever you like. 28bytes (talk) 17:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, and per WP:UPROT, user pages are automatically protected from editing by unconfirmed accounts and IP editors. That should be sufficient for now, but let me know if you run into any problems with vandalism and we can bump up the protection if needed. 28bytes (talk) 17:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Last question (hopefully), is there a way to edit my user page with the visual editor instead of the source editor? It's much harder for me to edit using the source editor, since I don't really know where to put brackets and curly braces and such. InfiniteSword (talk) 00:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I believe I need to sign my posts on talk pages like this? Idk, I've never done this before, this is just a test. InfiniteSword InfiniteSword (talk) 00:35, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- ohhhhh all I need to do is this InfiniteSword (talk) 00:35, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, you should be able to use the Visual Editor to edit your user page. WP:VisualEditor should give you the information you need to enable it. 28bytes (talk) 00:52, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I read the page but couldn't figure out how to enable the visual editor for my user page. Also, is there a way to redirect my user page on the Spanish Wiki to the English One? InfiniteSword (talk) 02:29, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- As far as I’m aware, you can’t do cross-wiki redirects. You’d just have to use a regular link. As for VisualEditor, I haven’t used it in many years, so unfortunately I’m probably not the best person to help troubleshoot it. The WP:Help desk might be able to better assist. 28bytes (talk) 03:15, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I read the page but couldn't figure out how to enable the visual editor for my user page. Also, is there a way to redirect my user page on the Spanish Wiki to the English One? InfiniteSword (talk) 02:29, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, you should be able to use the Visual Editor to edit your user page. WP:VisualEditor should give you the information you need to enable it. 28bytes (talk) 00:52, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- ohhhhh all I need to do is this InfiniteSword (talk) 00:35, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I believe I need to sign my posts on talk pages like this? Idk, I've never done this before, this is just a test. InfiniteSword InfiniteSword (talk) 00:35, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Last question (hopefully), is there a way to edit my user page with the visual editor instead of the source editor? It's much harder for me to edit using the source editor, since I don't really know where to put brackets and curly braces and such. InfiniteSword (talk) 00:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, and per WP:UPROT, user pages are automatically protected from editing by unconfirmed accounts and IP editors. That should be sufficient for now, but let me know if you run into any problems with vandalism and we can bump up the protection if needed. 28bytes (talk) 17:53, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- When you open a page that’s been redirected, there’s a line right under “From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia” that says “(Redirected from such-and-such)”. Click on the such-and-such link and it will let you edit the page and replace the #REDIRECT with whatever you like. 28bytes (talk) 17:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Just out of curiosity, how did you end up doing it? Also, is there a way to change it so that only autoconfirmed users can edit the page? You know, to avoid vandalism and stuff. InfiniteSword (talk) 16:26, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Technical Barnstar |
| Someone on Discord just pointed out that Conway's Game of Life has a playable version of the game. That's a delightful and unusual level of interactivity for a Wikipedia article -- cheers for that. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 02:26, 5 June 2024 (UTC) |
- Thanks! When I saw that gadget on Spanish Wikipedia I thought it would be nice to bring it to our wiki as well. 28bytes (talk) 02:43, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Ah! Thought you created it. No matter -- barnstar still deserved. I just need to give out another one now. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 03:17, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- I wish I had! It’s a cool little gadget. I may try my hand at creating one at some point, though; a three-body problem simulator came to mind. Xaosflux and Pppery deserve thanks for helping get the gadget going, as well as the gadget’s creators. 28bytes (talk) 14:00, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Ah! Thought you created it. No matter -- barnstar still deserved. I just need to give out another one now. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 03:17, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
June music
 | |
| story · music · places |
|---|
Today we have a centenarian story (documentation about it by Percy Adlon) and an article that had two sentences yesterday and was up for deletion, and needs a few more citations. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:46, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Today is a feast day for which Bach composed a chorale cantata in 1724 (and we had a DYK about it in 2012). Can't believe that Jodie Devos had to die, - don't miss her video from the Opéra-Comique at the end, - story to come. The weekend brought plenty of music sung and listened to, and some of it is reflected in the last two stories! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:51, 24 June 2024 (UTC)