User talk:331dot/Archive 6

Thanks Many thanks for answering all my questions in teahouse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kigagan (talk • contribs) 10:14, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deedo deletion

Hello

My page has been deleted by you, and I would like to retrieve the deleted material for future improvement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=delete&page=Deedo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bengirfr (talk • contribs) 13:22, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bengirfr: I would ask you if you are associated with the service you were writing about, as I notice it was the only thing you edited about. 331dot (talk) 13:25, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question

At a UAA report on User talk :SEAL team rep, you noted that the user name was "bring discussed". The report has since been archived. There is no discussion and this user has made zero talk page posts thus far. I'm just curious what you plan to do next? Thanks (also, while posting here, I noted that your talk page history has disappeared... what's up with that? Just curious...) - ^theWOLFchild 05:05, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just archived this page. I'll look at that user again. 331dot (talk) 07:53, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Jobs in islamabad

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 07:15, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Ikrewrwe

You may or may not want to revoke talk page access. All they seem to be doing is wikilawyering, more or less. --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Repel All Boarders ‖ 18:20, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unsalt please

I wrote to Sandstein but he hasn't edited today. Can you unsalt Kelly Sadler? I posted a draft on User talk:Sandstein to show that it is much better than the Kelly Sadler article that he speedily deleted. That draft could become much better if everyone in Wikipedia could improve on it. For now, the draft is crap but better crap than what was deleted. Please just do it because I don't want to go through red tape and post appeals and the sort. If you refuse, I give up. Cowdung Soup (talk) 03:18, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

199.101.62.36

Thanks for revoking TPA. Do you think it would be OK to remove the section with my name in the header or at least changing the header? I guess they didn't like me being the one to request the block at ANI. ... CJ [a Kiwi] in Oz 13:50, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, probably should have done it in the first place. It's removed now. 331dot (talk) 13:52, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, and thanks again ... CJ [a Kiwi] in Oz 14:00, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, name has been changed

FYI, my username was approved and changed. Cowding Soup (talk) 02:53, 16 May 2018 (UTC) (formerly known as Cowdung Soup)[reply]

mail-- it gets to you

Hello, 331dot. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.

Thanks - COI Noticeboard

Hello 331dot - thank you for you help on the COI Noticeboard project page - I'll post my COI as you've suggested from now on. Thanks - MrAttempt (talk) 08:38, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

Hello 331dot, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

ACTRIAL:

WP:ACREQ has been implemented. The flow at the feed has dropped back to the levels during the trial. However, the backlog is on the rise again so please consider reviewing a few extra articles each day; a backlog approaching 5,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders. They require your further verification.

Backlog drive:

A backlog drive will take place from 10 through 20 June. Check out our talk page at WT:NPR for more details. NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

Editathons

There will be a large increase in the number of editathons in June. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

Paid editing - new policy

Now that ACTRIAL is ACREQ, please be sure to look for tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. There is a new global WMF policy that requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines

The box at the right contains each of the subject-specific notability guidelines, please review any that are relevant BEFORE nominating an article for deletion.
Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves with the new version of the notability guidelines for organisations and companies.

Not English

A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, tag as required, then move to draft if they do have potential.

News

Development is underway by the WMF on upgrades to the New Pages Feed, in particular ORES features that will help to identify COPYVIOs, and more granular options for selecting articles to review.
The next issue of The Signpost has been published. The newspaper is one of the best ways to stay up to date with news and new developments. between our newsletters.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

If you care to do it again, I'm prepared to protect it. Deb (talk) 15:04, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the offer but I'm thinking that since I started a discussion it should probably play out for a tad first. 331dot (talk) 15:35, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Al Ameer son • AliveFreeHappy • Cenarium • Lupo • MichaelBillington

Guideline and policy news

Following a successful request for comment, administrators are now able to add and remove editors to the "event coordinator" group. Users in the event coordinator group have the ability to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit. Users will no longer need to be in the "account creator" group if they are in the event coordinator group.
Following an AN discussion, all pages with content related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies, broadly construed, are now under indefinite general sanctions.

Technical news

IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in June. This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team will build granular types of blocks in 2018 (e.g. a block from uploading or editing specific pages, categories, or namespaces, as opposed to a full-site block). Feedback on the concept may be left at the talk page.
There is now a checkbox on Special:ListUsers to let you see only users in temporary user groups.
It is now easier for blocked mobile users to see why they were blocked.

Arbitration

A recent technical issue with the Arbitration Committee's spam filter inadvertently caused all messages sent to the committee through Wikipedia (i.e. Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee) to be discarded. If you attempted to send an email to the Arbitration Committee via Wikipedia between May 16 and May 31, your message was not received and you are encouraged to resend it. Messages sent outside of these dates or directly to the Arbitration Committee email address were not affected by this issue.

Miscellaneous

In early May, an unusually high level of failed login attempts was observed. The WMF has stated that this was an "external effort to gain unauthorized access to random accounts". Under Wikipedia policy, administrators are required to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone explain to me what is going on?

Hi,

Yesterday I could not log on (as user Createangelos), and had never set an email address for a password reminder. As my account was lost I began following the instructions to change the username and link the accounts together. Partway through, I ran into trouble as the account name I chose which I use elsewhere, was already taken, so I tried spectrograph and Spectrograph which are taken. This is what I call myself on some other sites like academia. These being taken I changed it to SpectrographUK since I am in the UK. I made a website in the past with the same name. This was blocked as misleading/promotional (by a user or a bot?), and I followed the instructions to begin an appeal.

In the meantime, I finally remembered what I'd changed my password to, so this is not important, but just for the record, I am totally confused why my new username was blocked, and why my attempt to appeal was blocked.

Initially, I thought that it was related to this strange dispute User_talk:Createangelos#GMO_and_pesticide_topics which I also do not understand.

I do not want to make trouble and am not even sure if there is any point of principle I am meant to be defending. I just need it explained to me what is going on with that username. It is not in fact promotional (even if someone thought that it relates to my website spectrograph.uk, that website is shared client side javascript (it is, in fact, a spectrograph, and related to things like concepts of pollution), anyone can download it and keep it forever, so there could be no motive to promote it....except if there were a subconscious wish to dox myself...but that is too indirect I think and not what is going on).

What is the issue here? Did/should I make an appeal if my username choice has no conceivable way of being promotional or misleading? Why was my attempt to make an appeal just deleted?

Mainly I seem to be running into a lot of trouble and am a bit confused, maybe I need a rest or something. Createangelos (talk) 09:26, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Createangelos I simply moved your appeal to the proper place(your former user talk page, not your user page). 331dot (talk) 09:28, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! You can see how confused I am. Sorry& thanks.Createangelos (talk) 09:33, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm getting notifications that you wrote me more messages on the SpectrographUK talk page, however the user who blocked it has helpfully put a redirect so if I try to see the messages, I go back to my original Createangelos talk page. Can you pls cc your message either here or to User_talk:Createangelos? My main issue now is that if there is an appeal going on I should probably delete it. I did see the first few words of your comment in an email and I gather that it just isn't allowed to have usernames that reflect website names. That does makes sense as a blanket policy so I want to delete my appeal. But I cannot delete it because of the redirect! Can someone else delete my appeal and we can forget the whole issue now? Thanks.Createangelos (talk) 10:29, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The appeal has been resolved, and as you are already aware, the page has been turned into a redirect. The appeal was declined by another administrator simply because you still have access to the username you are using now. My only comment was that usernames cannot be that of a website regardless of the purpose of the website, and that if you really want "Spectrograph" in your username in a manner that is not that of a website, you are free to request a username change through one of the methods at WP:CHU. 331dot (talk) 10:33, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion by user you blocked, Steam Heatsystem

Hi 331dot, you recently blocked the user Steam Heatsystem for disruptive editing. They appear to be evading their block using 75.102.213.239, with much the same behaviour as Steam Heatsystem: reverting users with the summary of "WP:BLANK" when it doesn't apply (which Steam did), and accusing other editors (in this case, the editor VillageIdiot23) of racism, which they did to me and another editor when we removed their addition of a non-notable person's cover version to This Is America (song). Also, if that weren't enough, they undid a user who undid Steam Heatsystem here. Ss112 14:42, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion

Can you see User talk:Bellkumari09 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clockist (talk • contribs) 09:23, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed that matter. 331dot (talk) 09:25, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That troubling userpage I flagged

Howdy! Just to clarify why I flagged the Locortez userpage for attack-page deletion: it looked like the work of a homophobic schoolboy creating a page to make one of his classmates look like One Of Teh Gays, with the references to the person's IRL name, to "roids" (maybe it's just my idiosyncratic experience, but actual illicit drug users appear virtually never to use anything close to the actual name of the illicit drug in non-academic written prose) and to walking on the beach with "passionate men." I agree it's a borderline case, but it set off my bully detector. Thanks for looking at it, in any event; I just wanted to let you know I wasn't pulling my conclusion out of thin air! Have a good weekend! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 16:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Julietdeltalima: Thank you very much for your explanation. I did not think anything bad at all and figured there was at least a chance someone had a good reason for doing it. I try to take assume good faith seriously and just because I didn't see something doesn't mean someone else didn't. Thanks again 331dot (talk) 19:33, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Onel5969. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Ready or Not (video game), and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:46, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Hello 331dot, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

We can see the light at the end of the tunnel: there are currently 2900 unreviewed articles, and 4000 unreviewed redirects.

Announcing the Backlog Elimination Drive!

As a final push, we have decided to run a backlog elimination drive from the 20th to the 30th of June.
Reviewers who review at least 50 articles or redirects will receive a Special Edition NPP Barnstar: . Those who review 100, 250, 500, or 1000 pages will also receive tiered awards: , , , .
Please do not be hasty, take your time and fully review each page. It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Username soft blocks

I just noticed two of your reviews of appeals of blocks I placed. I don’t want to nitpick, but I feel like there is a slight disconnect here. In both cases these were soft blocks, which explicitly allow the user to just change their name and try again. Now, in both of these cases it is clear that the user making the appeal did not take the time to uderstand why they were blocked and how to properly appeal, but it looks like you are asking them to prove that they both understand our policies and have chosen a new username that is acceptable. User:Cars24India did in fact come up with a compliant username but you have declined anyway. This essentially converts it to a hard block without actually saying so or changing the settings.

The point of the soft block is to make it clear that they absolutely can’t use an ORGNAME, to advise them of policies on promotional editing, and at the same time to say “now that you’ve been told this, go ahead and try again.” The soft block is the tool of first resort for ORGNAME violations for exactly this reason. Both of these users could still just start a new account right now (if they bothered to carefully read the block notices I left) without having to ask anyone’s permission or prove they understand policy better now. If they don’t, they’ll be blocked again as spammers and a hard block would be the corect response.

If, on the other hand, you feel strngly that they should be hardblocked, you should change the block settings to reflect this and inform the blocked user that they are no longer free to just start a new account and must go through the appeal process. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:28, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I greatly appreciate your comments. I will work to keep them in mind. 331dot (talk) 01:13, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Username changed as you noticed

Hello @331dot,

I have started using wikipedia before few days and I have very little knowledge. I am trying my best to follow all the guidelines of wikipedia and becoming an active volunteer here. I need your help in my first article Spandana Palli. Unknowingly I had made a mistake in uploading photo in that article for which issue has been raised. I don't know how to resolve it. I request you to kindly help me in my first article as I have made alot of effort in that article.

Bdatech (talk) 15:51, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Acceptable account?

Account Leecholon95 was created. Make sure it is okay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1001:B006:7DE0:1478:8F3D:79D:B4E1 (talk) 19:51, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Duckadea

Please block this vandal account. See [1]. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 10:29, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. Should I revert all the edits? They seemed to be excess removal of wikilinks. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 10:33, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If they seem to be invalid, yes, you could remove them. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would also suggest that you stop engaging with the user, they seem to be deliberately attempting to rile you up. 331dot (talk) 10:35, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sorry I should not have assaulted him. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 10:37, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) I assume this is Nsmutte, with their fascination for our—admittedly fascinating :) —Bonadea. —SerialNumber54129^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 10:56, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Serial Number 54129: No, it's WhenDatHotlineBling. Both gentleentitles have their own distinct style. I feel like I'm in that episode of Buffy the Vampire Slayer where a spell goes awry and one of the characters turn into a demon magnet. Only with trolls rather than demons. (I'm really a rather nice person - I'm not sure I entirely deserve it!) --bonadea contributions talk 11:04, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! A lesson in identifying parasites is never wasted :) thanks! —SerialNumber54129^{paranoia /cheap sh*t room} 11:14, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2018).

Administrator changes

Pbsouthwood • TheSandDoctor

Gogo Dodo

Andrevan • Doug • EVula • KaisaL • Tony Fox • WilyD

Bureaucrat changes

Andrevan • EVula

Guideline and policy news

An RfC about the deletion of drafts closed with a consensus to change the wording of WP:NMFD. Specifically, a draft that has been repeatedly resubmitted and declined at AfC without any substantial improvement may be deleted at MfD if consensus determines that it is unlikely to ever meet the requirements for mainspace and it otherwise meets one of the reasons for deletion outlined in the deletion policy.
A request for comment closed with a consensus that the {{promising draft}} template cannot be used to indefinitely prevent a WP:G13 speedy deletion nomination.

Technical news

Starting on July 9, the WMF Security team, Trust & Safety, and the broader technical community will be seeking input on an upcoming change that will restrict editing of site-wide JavaScript and CSS to a new technical administrators user group. Bureaucrats and stewards will be able to grant this right per a community-defined process. The intention is to reduce the number of accounts who can edit frontend code to those who actually need to, which in turn lessens the risk of malicious code being added that compromises the security and privacy of everyone who accesses Wikipedia. For more information, please review the FAQ.
Syntax highlighting has been graduated from a Beta feature on the English Wikipedia. To enable this feature, click the highlighter icon () in your editing toolbar (or under the hamburger menu in the 2017 wikitext editor). This feature can help prevent you from making mistakes when editing complex templates.
IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in July (previously scheduled for June). This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.

Miscellaneous

Currently around 20% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 17% a year ago. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless if you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:22, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bimbo

Hi! We don't know each other but i need an advice/help from a neutral POV. I edited the page Bimbo adding this: [2]. Substantially, I simply explained the meaning of the italian word from which the US slang comes in order to contexualise it (it means "child") and i explained how it has became an insult in american english. Most of the infos were already in the article, but i thought some of them, better explained, should be in the lead. User:Flyer22 Reborn started an edit war ([3]), deleting without explanation the passage ([4]), deleting it a second time even when i pointed out that what i inserted was mostly already sourced/present in the article ([5]) and even deleting it against the rules a third time ([6]). What he argued (as you may read in the links) is fairly inconsistent. He invited me (as you can see in the links) to "talk" about it. Yet he deleted twice my messages to his talk page ([7] and [8]) and refused to answer to me, shutting down any possibility of collaborating in finding a common version of the passage. Now, to me this is a very distruptive behaviour: firstly he deleted a correct passage committing what i see as a vandalism, then when he was reverted he started inconsinstently referring to WP:Undue (which is ironic considering these infos are mostly already in the article, just not in the lead of it), then he asked to talk before any new edit and yet he refused to answer and deleted my messages to him, in a rude way, unecessarly calling my messages to him a "mess". Trusting your judgement as a sysop, i'll thank you if you could give a neutral POV on the situation for the better of the article, as any effort to find a common ground has been met with an unreasonable refuse to talk at all. Thank you. 93.36.190.141 (talk) 16:18, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will comment on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 21:52, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of my article

Hello. I totally understand that you are doing your job. I have a few questions about the removal of my page (speedy deletion that I did not have time to respond to...) -My page was reviewed, and someone later marked it as unreviewed. Why was it unreviewed? -The camp has been operational for over 100 years, and it has hosted thousands of campers and is well known in the Greenville area. -There are tons of other "Y" camps on Wikipedia. Including this one: YMCA Camp Orkila which seems just about as "notable" as the page I tried to create. If a "Y" camp is not notable enough to have a wikipedia page, then should't the 10+ other pages be removed as well?

I really appreciate you doing your job to help keep this website clean and professional. -Eamesheard (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:05, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Eamesheard: Hello. I would first state that just because other Y camps have articles does not automatically mean that all Y camps merit articles; other things exist. Each article is judged on its own merits. That said, I haven't evaluated those other articles on Y camps to know if they merit articles themselves. It's possible they don't. An article subject merits a Wikipedia article if it receives significant coverage in independent reliable sources that indcates how it meets the relevant notability guidelines, in this case WP:ORG.

In the case of the page you created, when I deleted it, the page did little more than state that the camp exists and what services are offered there. No independent sources were offered. I see that the camp was founded in 1912, so such sources may exist(they don't have to be online). The key is notability- and being old doesn't necessarily grant notability, especially without significant coverage in independent sources.

There was also some copyright issues before they were removed(you can't just reuse content here, see WP:COPYVIO). Please ask if you have any other questions. You might try, instead of directly creating a Wikipedia article, to create and submit a draft for review at Articles for Creation. This way you can get feedback on it before the draft is formally placed in the encyclopedia, instead of afterwards when it will be treated more critically. 331dot (talk) 21:51, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ANEW discussion

Can I close the discussion that was filed against the IP editor? It looks like it has been resolved. RandNetter96 (Talk) (Contributions) 17:11, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it best if you let someone totally uninvolved close it. 331dot (talk) 17:14, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would go further than 331dot and strongly suggest you should not do any administrative work whatsoever and focus solely on content. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:17, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Also, do you have any tips of where else to edit? RandNetter96 (Talk) (Contributions) 17:15, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You could start by looking at Nintendo Entertainment System and adding sources to the text currently tagged ^{[citation needed]}, as a starting point. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:17, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wholeheartedly endorse Ritchie's comments. The Community Portal also has suggestions of areas that need assistance. 331dot (talk) 17:19, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have added citations in that article. RandNetter96 (Talk) (Contributions) 17:31, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:86.153.150.159

Is it possible for you to revoke TP access also. Grossly offensive disruption since the block. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 00:09, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing that to my attention. 331dot (talk) 00:12, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for dealing with it! Is revdel required in view of the offensive 'comments' (baby rape etc.)? Eagleash (talk) 04:51, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point. Still getting used to this role and what I can do..... Thanks 331dot (talk) 09:37, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Must take a bit of 'getting used to!' Also there's some at Talk:Ian Watkins (Lostprophets) and possibly User talk:DeniedClub too. Sorry. 'More work'. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 15:03, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can you unprotect all the pages protected.

Dude you have so manypages unnessicarily protected! Undo it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.112.66.215 (talk) 22:33, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most if not all pages that are protected are so for a reason. If there are certain pages that you feel should not be protected any longer, WP:RPP is the proper forum to discuss it. 331dot (talk) 22:51, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be that guy, but actually the directions at RFPP for requesting unprotection specify that you should talk to the protecting admin first. Not that it matters with a hopelessly vague request like this one Beeblebrox (talk) 01:30, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. I appreciate all the help I get. :) 331dot (talk) 01:35, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a Biography for an Artist

Hi there @331dot I work for a company that helps artist develop their own wiki page. I am having a difficult time publishing the biography because it keeps getting deleted due to unreliable source of references and cites. What can I do about this. I appreciate all your help, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnpaultubig (talk • contribs) 19:27, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Johnnpaultubig: Hello. The first thing you need to do as soon as possible is review WP:COI and WP:PAID, and make the appropriate declarations on your user page. You are required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use to declare any paid editing status that you have. If you fail to do this, you may be blocked from editing until you comply.

You also seem to have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is not social media for users to have "their own wiki page". Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, which has articles about subjects shown to be notable with independent reliable sources. Using Wikipedia for promotional purposes is not permitted, nor is merely telling the world about someone. I understand that Wikipedia articles rank highly in search results, but helping someone's career is not a concern of Wikipedia. In this case, the individual you are writing about will need to have been written about in sources having nothing to do with her that have chosen to write about her. Her website or interview transcripts are not acceptable for establishing notability. IMDB is also not acceptable, as it is user-editable(like Wikipedia).

If there are not sufficient independent sources about this person, there cannot be a Wikipedia article about her at this time. You may wish to invest your energy in using actual social media or another alternative outlet to do what you are trying to do here. 331dot (talk) 19:38, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Nick Moyes. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Monika Jensen, and have un-reviewed it again. As you'll see from my reply at the Teahouse just a moment ago, in answering the OP I discovered the article was a blatant cut-paste job from IMDB which Monika Jensen Productions had written, and is clearly labelled as copyrighted content. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:49, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot Sbshuvo (talk) 10:44, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your suggestion to edit my page NOW Entertainment on draft.

@Sbshuvo: You will still need to answer the question as to if you are associated with the organization you are writing about. An undisclosed paid editing relationship could lead to your being blocked from editing. If you are an employee or other paid representative of the organization, you are required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use to disclose it. If you are not paid but still associated with the organization, it is a conflict of interest that also needs to be disclosed. 331dot (talk) 10:58, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: I am none of them. Thanks Sbshuvo

Edit warring at Pine tar

There is edit warring with a few users. —Heating172, 17:55, 27 July 2018

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months. (Purge)

Hello 331dot, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

June backlog drive

Overall the June backlog drive was a success, reducing the last 3,000 or so to below 500. However, as expected, 90% of the patrolling was done by less than 10% of reviewers.
Since the drive closed, the backlog has begun to rise sharply again and is back up to nearly 1,400 already. Please help reduce this total and keep it from raising further by reviewing some articles each day.

New technology, new rules

New features are shortly going to be added to the Special:NewPagesFeed which include a list of drafts for review, OTRS flags for COPYVIO, and more granular filter preferences. More details can be found at this page.
Probationary permissions: Now that PERM has been configured to allow expiry dates to all minor user rights, new NPR flag holders may sometimes be limited in the first instance to 6 months during which their work will be assessed for both quality and quantity of their reviews. This will allow admins to accord the right in borderline cases rather than make a flat out rejection.
Current reviewers who have had the flag for longer than 6 months but have not used the permissions since they were granted will have the flag removed, but may still request to have it granted again in the future, subject to the same probationary period, if they wish to become an active reviewer.

Editathons

Editathons will continue through August. Please be gentle with new pages that obviously come from good faith participants, especially articles from developing economies and ones about female subjects. Consider using the 'move to draft' tool rather than bluntly tagging articles that may have potential but which cannot yet reside in mainspace.

The Signpost

The next issue of the monthly magazine will be out soon. The newspaper is an excellent way to stay up to date with news and new developments between our newsletters. If you have special messages to be published, or if you would like to submit an article (one about NPR perhaps?), don't hesitate to contact the editorial team here.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shubhankar Tiwari

Sorry but u send me an alert that i should stop my disruptive editing. Why u think my editing is disruptive?Shubhankar Tiwari (talk) 18:08, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Shubhankar Tiwari: You added spam to the Teahouse, which is disruptive because 1) the Teahouse is for new users to ask questions and 2) spam and advertising is not permitted anywhere on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 20:45, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2018).

Administrator changes

Sro23

KaisaL • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

After a discussion at Meta, a new user group called "interface administrators" (formerly "technical administrator") has been created. Come the end of August, interface admins will be the only users able to edit site-wide JavaScript and CSS pages like MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css, or edit other user's personal JavaScript and CSS. The intention is to improve security and privacy by reducing the number of accounts which could be used to compromise the site or another user's account through malicious code. The new user group can be assigned and revoked by bureaucrats. Discussion is ongoing to establish details for implementing the group on the English Wikipedia.
Following a request for comment, the WP:SISTER style guideline now states that in the mainspace, interwiki links to Wikinews should only be made as per the external links guideline. This generally means that within the body of an article, you should not link to Wikinews about a particular event that is only a part of the larger topic. Wikinews links in "external links" sections can be used where helpful, but not automatically if an equivalent article from a reliable news outlet could be linked in the same manner.

Technical news

The WMF Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input on the second set of wireframes for the Special:Block redesign that will introduce partial blocks. The new functionality will allow you to block a user from editing a specific set of pages, pages in a category, a namespace, and for specific actions such as moving pages and uploading files.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:31, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Harts Early Life

You recently took down some information that I added about he's early life, but I have reviewed it and double checked my facts. At the end of last month after doing an interview with him, I have done extra research and Wikipedia did not seem to have some of that information. I understand that you doing your job and really appreciate it but I have checked it over to make sure that nothing is false and it was true information that I have put in. John Appleberg (talk) 05:04, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@John Appleberg: I have no reason to doubt that what you say is true, that is not the issue. Please see WP:TRUTH. Wikipedia is not interested in truth per se, but in what can be verified in an independent reliable source. A personal interview you had with Kevin Hart does not meet that criteria. Anyone on the internet can claim to have interviewed any person; that is difficult to verify. This is why Wikipedia asks for a published source for all information, especially that in an article about a living person. Your interview would need to be published somewhere in order to meet the criteria for inclusion. If your interview is published somewhere, that would be an improvement, but you still should not add its information to the article without discussion on the article talk page due to the large conflict of interest you have. 331dot (talk) 08:23, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see that someone else has now reverted your addition. I again ask you to proceed as I have described both here and on your user talk page. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 08:25, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Subst

Remember to substitute unsigned templates. Regards ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 08:47, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Harts Early Life

Thank you for your help and support, I'll take it in consideration next time. Enjoy your day. John Appleberg (talk) 14:17, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously?

This is bity. I don't like COI editing, but they were asking for a simple logo change, something that many COI editors ask us to do at the Teahouse and Help desk. They didn't need the whole book thrown at them. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:33, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your views but I think it important to address those important policies right away so they don't have problems in the future. It was not my intention to throw the book at anyone and I thought that I was polite. 331dot (talk) 20:55, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for your help 331dot, I appreciate it. I am unblocked now and looking forward to contributing.A.kenney (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:11, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User talk:Shortdutchman240

Hey, thanks for the ping! In the future, don't hesitate to unblock if you feel the given unblock reason is sufficient :) -- Luk ^talk 12:15, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate it. Still getting used to this role and figuring out how bold to be in those situations; making sure I didn't miss something. 331dot (talk) 12:17, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ITN comment

Did you remove this comment of mine by accident, or because you thought it wasn't constructive. I'll leave it out for the minute because it is a bit inflammatory and unlikely to lead to constructive debate. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:27, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize. I didn't intend to remove your comment.(or even realize I did). I think an edit conflict got in the way. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I'll leave it out for the minute and work on something else, I think. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:30, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Charlesnelson

Hi 331dot. Would you mind taking a look at User talk:Charlesnelson#Please review blocking. The unblock request is not formatted correctly which is a simple of enough fix, but there maybe something more involved here than unintentional impersonation. Anyway, perhaps you can clarify what this editor needs to do to have their account unblocked. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:48, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Fresh2refresh

You may wish to revoke talk page access.--Cahk (talk) 08:15, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In this case

The IP was doing us a favour. I've removed the report again. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:19, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ponyo I appreciate your insight; thank you. Still learning this stuff..... 331dot (talk) 23:20, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Do you have User:NuclearWarfare/Mark-blocked script.js enabled? It makes it easy to see who's blocked when reviewing edits. Just another tool in the toolbox. --Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 23:23, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Does that go in my common.js? 331dot (talk) 08:41, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's where I stuck mine. There are a few there, feel free to poach whatever strikes your fancy.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 17:43, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Medicine Club

Can you please explain why this page Medicine Club is deleted?? I don't know why this is happening. But I tried to give some references from newspaper. There should be a content about Medicine Club as they are working as a volunteer for blood donation and aware people about thalassemia. So it is important to have a content about them because people wanted to know about them. So, please help me about it. I shall be grateful to you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sifat Amin (talk • contribs) 14:52, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sitar Amin The page gets deleted because 1) the content was a copyright violation, which is not allowed, and 2) there was a deletion discussion that led to it (please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Medicine Club). In order for it to be recreated, the concerns in the deletion discussion need to be addressed, and they haven't been. This organization must be shown to meet the notability guidelines at WP:ORG, as shown with in depth coverage (not just press releases or brief mentions) in independent reliable sources. I'm glad that the organization does good work, but Wikipedia is not for publicizing good organizations or otherwise merely telling the world about good causes.

If you think you have new information to consider, you can start a discussion at Deletion Review. I would add that if you represent this organization, you need to read about conflict of interest at WP:COI. 331dot (talk) 15:20, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Asterion • Crisco 1492 • KF • Kudpung • Liz • Randykitty • Spartaz

Optimist on the run → Voice of Clam

Interface administrator changes

Amorymeltzer • Mr. Stradivarius • MusikAnimal • MSGJ • TheDJ • Xaosflux

Guideline and policy news

Following a "stop-gap" discussion, six users have temporarily been made interface administrators while discussion is ongoing for a more permanent process for assigning the permission. Interface administrators are now the only editors allowed to edit sitewide CSS and JavaScript pages, as well as CSS/JS pages in another user's userspace. Previously, all administrators had this ability. The right can be granted and revoked by bureaucrats.

Technical news

Because of a data centre test you will be able to read but not edit the wikis for up to an hour on 12 September and 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time. The time when you can't edit might be shorter than an hour.
Some abuse filter variables have changed. They are now easier to understand for non-experts. The old variables will still work but filter editors are encouraged to replace them with the new ones. You can find the list of changed variables on mediawiki.org. They have a note which says Deprecated. Use ... instead. An example is article_text which is now page_title.
Abuse filters can now use how old a page is. The variable is page_age.

Arbitration

The Arbitration Committee has resolved to perform a round of Checkuser and Oversight appointments. The usernames of all applicants will be shared with the Functionaries team, and they will be requested to assist in the vetting process. The deadline to submit an application is 23:59 UTC, 12 September, and the candidates that move forward will be published on-wiki for community comments on 18 September.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:22, 2 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Global rename

Hi. As you do a lot of work reviewing unblock requests, have you considered applying for global rename permission? It's a big help, meaning we can rename and unblock in one go and not have to send the editor to make a separate rename request. It's requested at meta:Steward requests/Global permissions and is a pretty straightforward process. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:40, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't considered it, but thank you for the suggestion. I may just do that. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Noramiao

Could this user perhaps be indeffed with removal of talk page access? They are doing the same incremental removal crud after their prior block expired and are clearly WP:NOTHERE. Thanks. --Ebyabe (talk) 04:30, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Natasha Fatah

Hello Now this is not an attack on your nationality, rather, it is an observation, base don th enumbe rof U.S. Wikipedians and the news channels in the U.S. You are likely from the United States, and thus your news comes from sources such as CNn and ABC, both of whom are much better than CBC at updating their websites and bios. Fore example, CBC anchor Suhana Meharchand is away on medical due to a surgery until late October, yet the News Network schedule often lists Suhana Meharchand as on from 10:00 AM Eastern to 1:00 PM Eastern, despite it being an Indian woman named Reshmi Nair. (that's India Indian) I have had to put pressure on the cbc team to make the change so it says Reshmi Nair, but this change has not fully taken effect. The same is happening with Natasha Fatah. While John Northcott, the former host of this slot is filling in today, Fatah is now the main host of that slot.

How is it not enough of a source that Natasha Fatah is on CBC News Network most weekend mornings since May? Please help me here. 199.101.62.30 (talk) 14:33, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated, it is fine to simply state that she works for them without a specific source. If she is assigned to a specific program, something is needed that states that. The article Chuck Todd has a source that indicates he was selected to host Meet the Press. Maybe you can contact the CBC and ask them to be more diligent about updating the public bios of their staff, but we need something indicating she was assigned to a particular program if that is the case. If the CBC drags its feet in updating their public bios, there isn't much Wikipedia can do about that. 331dot (talk) 14:37, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you. you are much clearer than Shark Slayer was on this. I am working at CBC to do updates to their bios, I mean they only recently removed their bio of Anne-Marie Mediwake, even though she hasn't been on CBC for eons. There is also articles such as this and [[CBC News Network (TV series)|this) that list when they host or what roll they have, i.e. that Hannah Thibedeau is a primary fill-in anchor, meaning she is one of th emain go-to picks for a fill-in when Reshmi, Heather or Andrew are away. thanks. 199.101.62.30 (talk) 14:50, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you are saying that you are employed by the CBC, you need to declare that on the article talk page. See WP:COI and WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 15:08, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

no i am not saying that, it's a Canadian term, to work at someone is to pressure them. 199.101.62.30 (talk) 15:13, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK. My apologies. 331dot (talk) 15:18, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's okay. Just remember, in Canada, a child works at his mom to take him to EB Games to get a 3DS and Pokemon Sun and Moon, while Natasha Fatah works with the CBC. thanks. 199.101.62.30 (talk) 15:20, 9 September 2018 (UTC) I do want to bring to attention though that time slots for anchors are given on th epages CBC News Network and CBC News Network (TV series) by the way that page should not be named "tv series" it should be called "program" as it is not an episodic series such as th eWeekly with Wendy Mesley, it's a rolling news broadcast for lack of a better term. Maybe TV series means something south of the boarder, just as "worked at " means something different North of the boarder. thanks 199.101.62.30 (talk) 17:21, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CBC News Network pages

Hello Given the discussion above about sources being needed for the listing of rolls for host son CBC NN, what is your suggestion for the the two pages that list the rolls of anchors? Should those be removed? If not, why not? Please help. thanks PS, per Shark slayer's comments, I'm not Anti American, rather, I hate American university standards as they are overly picky, speciffically Chicago's writing style. So no hate to America, nothing but love to America from me.

199.101.62.30 (talk) 14:13, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest discussing this on one of the article talk pages, as this subject area is not my area of expertise, but my suggestion would be to remove the specific programs next to the names, but leave the names(as you can confirm their presence on the network by watching it). 331dot (talk) 14:31, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'll get to that in a little while. thanks. 199.101.62.30 (talk) 16:07, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello I removed the rolls of the anchors on both pages for now, and put messages on the talk pages explaining the removing of the rolls. What do you recommend I do should somebody restore them without sources, can you please keep an eye on both pages so I don't get dinged for edit waring? thanks.

My explanation is as follows, on both talk pages: Hello Per a discussion between 331 dot and myself, I have decided to remove all the rolls of the anchors on this article until a reliable source confirming their rolls can be found. Please do not restore until you hav esourced all of them. thanks. 199.101.62.30 (talk) 20:10, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I may not be able to monitor the pages closely, but if someone removes your change you should then start a discussion on the article talk page. If the other party does not engage you in discussion, then you should move to dispute resolution. 331dot (talk) 21:04, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, even if you pop in ocasionally I'm cool with it, or even if you add to the discussions on the talk pages to give your case, since I am doing this based on the case you made to me. Again I'm glad you explained what has to happen for the rolls to be listed, many others on Wikipedia expect me to always know what they mean by "reliably sourced", when often times standards differ from nation as well as interpretation. I.e. some view Fox News as reliable while others do not, some view Huffington Post as a good source while others do not. Your standard of it having to be listed on the official website is a good clear standard, and I thank you again for explaining that to me. Perhaps if more Wikipedians quickly explained themselves a bit better as to what kind of source is acceptable for a particular thing that they are going after me on, it would lead to less conflict and threats of blocks or else sicking admins on me. thanks again for showing why Admins are great.

199.101.62.30 (talk) 01:25, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hello, 331dot. Please check your email; you've got mail!
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.

Trijnstel_talk 12:54, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Amy Wadge

hi there thanks for the message - i don't really understand why having the list of people that i have written for has been decided to be un necessary when all the songwriters i know have their song writing credits listed on Wiki. I appreciate that it may not be the best idea for me to edit my own page but i feel that i will have the most accurate knowledge on my own career - it seems strange that someone else can just remove what i have posted any help you can give me would be appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenki1975 (talk • contribs) 16:07, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a forum for actors, musicians, or any professional to merely post information about themselves. Wikipedia is only interested in what independent reliable sources state about article subjects. Autobiographical edits are highly discouraged because people naturally write favorably about themselves, and they may also not understand(at least immediately) what is being looked for in articles by Wikipedia editors. If information in the article about you is incorrect, we want to know what it is, however. As I stated, you should make an edit request on the article talk page to suggest any changes you want to see. As the editor who reverted your changes noted, most of what you added was unsourced(and you removed information that was sourced). While I believe what you say, (as I stated) we have no way of knowing you are who you say you are, so we cannot just take your word for it(confirming your identity as I stated earlier will help, but we still can't just take people's word). What you state needs to be documented somewhere in an independent reliable source. 331dot (talk) 16:16, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot edit

I cannot edit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Concerns_about_an_admin_user._My_edits_are_not_disruptive,_uncivil,_or_harassing._Don't_accuse_me_of_it. to comment. Ok, so he's not an admin. He certainly seems to be reverting and harassing me. My complaint about the user -- admin or not -- is still valid. As are my edits — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.173.218.150 (talk) 17:03, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will transfer this reply to there, but as the user is not an administrator no action will be taken there. ANI is for behavior disputes, not content disputes. If discussion fails to resolve a content dispute, you then need to engage in dispute resolution. 331dot (talk) 17:11, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All I was trying to do was remove an unencyclopedic paragraph. I don't have time for all this runaround. Hopefully that guy's revert has been reverted. I'm done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.173.218.150 (talk) 17:12, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GWB

Please check out the Book, Six Bridges, the Legacy of Othmar Ammann. It will state Cass Gilbert was Architect, Allston Dana was Engineer of design and Othmnar Ammann was Chief Engineer. I have original plans for the GWB and it states Allston Dana is Engineer of design. I will take photos of this and show it to you! Okay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grillage 2 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Grillage 2 Taking photos is not necessary, but if that is what the book states, you may wish to comment at Talk:George Washington Bridge and bring this to the attention of the editors who follow that article. 331dot (talk) 23:26, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This talk for Wikipedia is a little confusing for me. Could you please explain exactly how to do this? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grillage 2 (talk • contribs) 23:39, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you click this link: Talk:George Washington Bridge, it will take you to where you can post a comment explaining what you have found. Click "New section" at the top of the page, this will open up an edit window much like the one you used to edit this page. There is a small box for you to type a section header under the words "Subject/headline", and below that is the main edit window where you can type your statement. You then click "Publish" just as you did to edit this page. 331dot (talk) 23:45, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Hey we have both seen that a user in the teahouse is desperate to create a bot,we tried to make him understand but he is desperate to create.So please look at this matter.Kigagan (talk) 10:50, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

THQ

FYI, this was not lost in the transfer. It was removed as inappropriately using the Teahouse as a forum. Unless we want to look at community consensus for a range block, which seems iffy that there'll be, seems like the simplest way to handle the issue. GMG ^talk 13:14, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I understand now. Please accept my apologies. Thank you 331dot (talk) 13:19, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I took a few stabs at trying to find where this might be block avoidance, which seems likely given their..."approach" to editing. But came up with nothing. Honestly, TOJ has been in conflict with so many editors on so many articles, that it's hard for any one of them to be singled out for a duck test. Does look like they managed to hit 4rr yesterday on Sleepers under :cfec, but they stopped edit warring without protection, so that's probably stale at this point for the purposes of justifying a range block. GMG ^talk 13:25, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your efforts on it. Probably this will just need to be monitored. 331dot (talk) 13:29, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

Hello 331dot, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

The New Page Feed currently has 2700 unreviewed articles, up from just 500 at the start of July. For a while we were falling behind by an average of about 40 articles per day, but we have stabilised more recently. Please review some articles from the back of the queue if you can (Sort by: 'Oldest' at Special:NewPagesFeed), as we are very close to having articles older than one month.

Project news

The New Page Feed now has a new "Articles for Creation" option which will show drafts instead of articles in the feed, this shouldn't impact NPP activities and is part of the WMF's AfC Improvement Project.

As part of this project, the feed will have some larger updates to functionality next month. Specifically, ORES predictions will be built in, which will automatically flag articles for potential issues such as vandalism or spam. Copyright violation detection will also be added to the new page feed. See the projects's talk page for more info.

There are a number of coordination tasks for New Page Patrol that could use some help from experienced reviewers. See Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Coordination#Coordinator tasks for more info to see if you can help out.

Other

A new summary page of reliable sources has been created; Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources/Perennial sources, which summarizes existing RfCs or RSN discussions about regularly used sources.

Moving to Draft and Page Mover

Some unsuitable new articles can be best reviewed by moving them to the draft space, but reviewers need to do this carefully and sparingly. It is most useful for topics that look like they might have promise, but where the article as written would be unlikely to survive AfD. If the article can be easily fixed, or if the only issue is a lack of sourcing that is easily accessible, tagging or adding sources yourself is preferable. If sources do not appear to be available and the topic does not appear to be notable, tagging for deletion is preferable (PROD/AfD/CSD as appropriate). See additional guidance at WP:DRAFTIFY.
If the user moves the draft back to mainspace, or recreates it in mainspace, please do not re-draftify the article (although swapping it to maintain the page history may be advisable in the case of copy-paste moves). AfC is optional except for editors with a clear conflict of interest.
Articles that have been created in contravention of our paid-editing-requirements or written from a blatant NPOV perspective, or by authors with a clear COI might also be draftified at discretion.
The best tool for draftification is User:Evad37/MoveToDraft.js^(info). Kindly adapt the text in the dialogue-pop-up as necessary (the default can also be changed like this). Note that if you do not have the Page Mover userright, the redirect from main will be automatically tagged as CSD R2, but in some cases it might be better to make this a redirect to a different page instead.
The Page Mover userright can be useful for New Page Reviewers; occasionally page swapping is needed during NPR activities, and it helps avoid excessive R2 nominations which must be processed by admins. Note that the Page Mover userright has higher requirements than the NPR userright, and is generally given to users active at Requested Moves. Only reviewers who are very experienced and are also very active reviewers are likely to be granted it solely for NPP activities.

List of other useful scripts for New Page Reviewing

Twinkle provides a lot of the same functionality as the page curation tools, and some reviewers prefer to use the Twinkle tools for some/all tasks. It can be activated simply in the gadgets section of 'preferences'. There are also a lot of options available at the Twinkle preferences panel after you install the gadget.
In terms of other gadgets for NPR, HotCat is worth turning on. It allows you to easily add, remove, and change categories on a page, with name suggestions.
MoreMenu also adds a bunch of very useful links for diagnosing and fixing page issues.
User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js^(info): Installing scripts doesn't have to be complicated. Go to your common.js and copy importScript( 'User:Equazcion/ScriptInstaller.js' ); into an empty line, now you can install all other scripts with the click of a button from the script page! (Note you need to be at the ".js" page for the script for the install button to appear, not the information page)
User:TheJosh/Scripts/NewPagePatrol.js^(info): Creates a scrolling new pages list at the left side of the page. You can change the number of pages shown by adding the following to the next line on your common.js page (immediately after the line importing this script): npp_num_pages=20; (Recommended 20, but you can use any number from 1 to 50).
User:Primefac/revdel.js^(info): Is requesting revdel complicated and time consuming? This script helps simplify the process. Just have the Copyvio source URL and go to the history page and collect your diff IDs and you can drop them into the script Popups and it will create a revdel request for you.
User:Lourdes/PageCuration.js^(info): Creates a "Page Curation" link to Special:NewPagesFeed up near your sandbox link.
User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js: Creates links next to the title of each page which show up if it has been previously deleted or nominated for deletion.
User:Evad37/rater.js^(info): A fantastic tool for adding WikiProject templates to article talk pages. If you add: rater_autostartNamespaces = 0; to the next line on your common.js, the prompt will pop up automatically if a page has no Wikiproject templates on the talk page (note: this can be a bit annoying if you review redirects or dab pages commonly).

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:11, 17 September 2018 (UTC) [reply]

How do I send a message to someone with no button on their talk page??

How can I send a message to someone who does not have a button on their talk page? I specifically want to contact Volcanoguy

Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.125.246.81 (talk) 07:17, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have figured it out. 331dot (talk) 07:58, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User unblock reconsideration

Hi 331dot. I have just CSD'd the article Nambe Media, as A7, but probably Promo also applies. The author has only just returned from an indefinite block he successfully appealed. I'm not sure if the WP rules really are understood. This is an article that is effectively unsourced and about a business enterprise he runs himself (username = name of CEO). It may be worth revisiting the block. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 08:27, 19 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

request on Eliot Cutler

I see you are an administrator. To help break the logjam, could you please provide the previous, deleted version of Eliot Cutler article, to draftspace I suppose, to inform the three ongoing discussions (deletion review, its Talk page, 2nd AFD). I am sorry there is duplication now, partly my fault arguably, I am not sure. --Doncram (talk) 18:54, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reluctant to use my administrator powers in this matter, even at your request. Is there another admin that you could ask? 331dot (talk) 19:29, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Specifically maybe I should not have restored the article and let the deletion review proceed to conclusion instead. I saw it as separate though, and that there could be productive discussion at its Talk page, and thought the new AFD should be stopped, but I see at this point the duplication is just happening. I don't think I have ever been successful in getting an AFD cancelled, once started, oh well. Hope there are no hard feelings. --Doncram (talk) 21:34, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have no hard feelings at all. I do not question your good faith. 331dot (talk) 21:37, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why may I be blocked when it was Borsoka who deleted the original comment from my disruptive admin page submission???

??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.74.178 (talk) 08:52, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Um, you removed their comment, not the other way around. And I'm only dealing with the page in front of me at the moment. 331dot (talk) 09:00, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should we keep Bill Cosby's inmate number?

Is his inmate number and prison location relevant? 2605:6001:E7DD:AC00:D022:802D:5248:401B (talk) 02:48, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Prison location yes, inmate number no. Fixed. --Ebyabe (talk) 03:04, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

eCl@ss page

Hello, thank you for reviewing the eCl@ss page. You tagged eCl@ss with notability and primary sources tags. - I appreciate this feedback which hopefully results in better quality.. I have tried to provide alternative sources (not easy to find English references, because most alternative sources are German). I left the tags on the page, because I am not confident enough to remove them. Could you please review the page again and check if there are sufficient independent sources? Thank you! Thadlich (talk) 05:47, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the primary sources tag, but I will leave the other tag for a different set of eyes to review. 331dot (talk) 08:05, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Thadlich (talk) 12:12, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-spoof and renames

Hey, re: User talk:TaylorRhodes, the account that was trigerring the anti-spoof there had zero global edits and was created 4.5 years ago and had zero global edits. I checked with a steward, and they agreed this would be an appropriate circumstance to override the anti-spoof filters as a renamer (which you have the ability to do.) They said that there's no hard rule, but that generally the ACC guidelines are a good rule of thumb to follow in these circumstances. Didn't want to think I was stepping on your toes, but also didn't want to further confuse a new user, so I went ahead and did it: hope you don't mind! TonyBallioni (talk) 04:50, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@TonyBallioni: I don't mind at all. Thanks for the assist and the information. 331dot (talk) 07:46, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to provide consultancy

Hi 331dot,

I'm inviting admins to join our team at parli.co providing advice on how to build and manage a collaborative website. Parli.co is an emerging project aiming at building a sort of Wikipedia of arguments around controversial topics (more info here). Part of our budget will be destined to such consultancy work, and we think we could benefit from the experience of Wikipedia janitors and admins. Feel free to message me back with interest and questions. --isacdaavid 21:36, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2018).

Administrator changes

Justlettersandnumbers • L235

Bgwhite • HorsePunchKid • J Greb • KillerChihuahua • Rami R • Winhunter

Interface administrator changes

Cyberpower678 • Deryck Chan • Oshwah • Pharos • Ragesoss • Ritchie333

Oversight changes

Guerillero • NativeForeigner • Snowolf • Xeno

Guideline and policy news

Following a request for comment, the process for appointing interface administrators has been established. Currently only existing admins can request these rights, while a new RfC has begun on whether it should be available to non-admins.
There is an open request for comment on Meta regarding the creation a new user group for global edit filter management.

Technical news

Partial blocks should be available for testing in October on the Test Wikipedia and the Beta-Cluster. This new feature allows admins to block users from editing specific pages and in the near-future, namespaces and uploading files. You can expect more updates and an invitation to help with testing once it is available.
The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team is currently looking for input on how to measure the effectiveness of blocks. This is in particular related to how they will measure the success of the aforementioned partial blocks.
Because of a data centre test, you will be able to read but not edit the Wikimedia projects for up to an hour on 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time.

Arbitration

The Arbitration Committee has, by motion, amended the procedure on functionary inactivity.
The community consultation for 2018 CheckUser and Oversight appointments has concluded. Appointments will be made by October 11.
Following a request for comment, the size of the Arbitration Committee will be decreased to 13 arbitrators, starting in 2019. Additionally, the minimum support percentage required to be appointed to a two-year term on ArbCom has been increased to 60%. ArbCom candidates who receive between 50% and 60% support will be appointed to one-year terms instead.
Nominations for the 2018 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission are being accepted until 12 October. These are the editors who help run the ArbCom election smoothly. If you are interested in volunteering for this role, please consider nominating yourself.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for those usernames just now. I do sometimes just quietly sit and wonder to myself why we bother ... but thanks! Cheers DBaK (talk) 08:28, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Darn you and your superior speed and efficiency! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:35, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, 331dot. You have new messages at BHillJr's talk page.
Message added 19:05, 9 October 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Huff slush7264 Chat With Me 19:05, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kiwi help

Hey, I'm pretty sure "Kiwi help" refers to #wikipedia-en-help on irc. KiwiIRC is a common web client. DragonflySixtyseven is a regular there, and an admin on-wiki. SQL ^{Query me!} 23:06, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Username violation

Hi 331dot, How are you? Would this be a username violation.Satans Botty. It may be my first detection of a username violation, but could be wide, continent wide of the mark. I thought it was a weird name. scope_creep (talk) 12:27, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep: I don't think you are a mile off the mark, although the name seems to reflect the user's area of interest. 331dot (talk) 12:32, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yip, seems to the like the devils. The user wants to merge the two devil articles, one is about the devil, and one is about the concept of the devil, some overlap, but really different concepts. I'll leave it with you. Thanks. scope_creep (talk) 12:43, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question about valid sources

Hi,

First off thanks for advocating for my reinstatement of my Username and status. I really appreciate it. I have been adding to a few pages and learning a lot about how the Wikipedia works. I do have a question about valid sources.

I was looking over the DOOM article and noticed some stuff is out of date because of the new lore revealed from the newer games. Mostly origin story stuff. The sources come from a few places such has official game forums, YouTube videos, reddit, WikiDoom, and such.

I'm not sure if a YouTube video source is considered valid or not. For that matter if forums count at all, even if they are fan created and have a consensus. Like to make sure before I contribute.

There is a really good Quora article I found as well. Again not sure if I can use it. https://www.quora.com/Is-there-a-complete-backstory-about-the-2016-DOOM-guy-e-g-how-he-came-to-obtain-his-ungodly-power-why-he-was-put-into-stasis-at-game-start-etc

Thanks!

ReliableShick (talk) 14:02, 12 October 2018 (UTC)ReliableShick[reply]

YouTube videos can sometimes be valid sources, but sometimes not too. It depends on things like who made it, did it have editorial control, and other things like that. If it is something from the Doom makers that just documents plot points or aspects of making the game, it might be okay. The other source you speak of seems to be a blog(might be wrong), and if so, blogs and posts from commenters on them are not usually considered reliable sources, because they usually lack editorial control/review. 331dot (talk) 14:32, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Haiyenslna

sock is spamming if you or any tps' are around. Hope all is well. Cheers! ——SerialNumber54129 10:39, 13 October 2018 (UTC) ..although I thik I see Anarchyte on the horizon...? ;) ——SerialNumber54129 10:46, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Serial Number 54129: Handed them a lvl2 custom warning, but if they continue after this, I'll consider blocking. Cheers for the ping :) Anarchyte (talk | work) 10:52, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, seems Alex Shih knew something I didn't about their past and gifted them a year block. Anarchyte (talk | work) 10:55, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, they're building up quite a CV in their new career as an LTA :) Thanks to you both for dealing with it though. Take care! ——SerialNumber54129 10:59, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes. I am keeping this for the record. Alex Shih (talk) 11:12, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Trout!

Whack!
You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly.

For a "compromised account" block of a user who simply did not have any clue about what was happening. Not because you did not know about SUL and stuff (we live and learn - I heard fish is good for memory, though), but because checking global contributions reveals no edit to Indonesian or Ukrainian pages unlike what the poster said, so it should have made you pause and think. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:16, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Tigraan: Thank you for making me aware of the tool to check all contributions, I did not know that was even possible. 331dot (talk) 17:43, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User Silentkiller888

User Silentkiller888 has edited between last 2-3 weeks and the username is a clear violation to Wikipedia Policy.I request you to recheck the matter.And he has also made unconstructive edits on film articles.Md.Ali25 (talk) 09:05, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Md.Ali25: According to their edit history they have not edited since October 1st, today is the 18th(where I am at least), that's over two weeks. Their edits also do not seem particularly problematic to me, to the point of deserving a block- which is not an issue for the username board. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Overall article

Hi there, I see the above article is due for deletion although I have provided many citations/references that refer directly to the living person. Could you please elaborate on why the article still has issues? Thanks Shroomkin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shroomkin (talk • contribs) 13:06, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Shroomkin: If you have added sources, the deletion tag I used is resolved (and has already been removed), although that does not mean it won't be deleted for another reason. To resolve the notability tag, you need to make it clear (with independent reliable sources) how the person meets at least one of the guidelines at WP:BAND. 331dot (talk) 14:11, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot There are a few independent, reliable sources that indicate how the person meets the guidelines at WP:Band namely citations 1,2 & 3 or am I missing something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shroomkin (talk • contribs) 14:28, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have now added independent sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shroomkin (talk • contribs) 07:41, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

UAA

Per WP:MISLEADNAME usernames should not contain the word Wikipedia, (Usernames including phrases such as "wikipedia", "wikimedia", "wiktionary", "(WMF)", or similar if they give the incorrect impression that the account may be officially affiliated with the Wikimedia Foundation or one of its projects.) - FlightTime (open channel) 14:59, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@FlightTime:. It is not against policy to merely have "Wikipedia" in a username, as was the case with the name in question. Only if a username suggests they have some official role or authority they do not actually have(i.e. "WikipediaAdmin123", "John (WMF)") is the name against policy. That's why I questioned the name, and another admin removed the report. 331dot (talk) 16:42, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Then please amend the policy page to reflect your point of view. Thank you, - FlightTime (open channel) 16:46, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It already says that, and it isn't just my viewpoint, as I indicated. I have no power to unilaterally amend any policy, but you are free to request the same at UAA's talk page. However, I believe that you will be told the same thing. 331dot (talk) 16:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

Chart of the New Pages Patrol backlog for the past 6 months.

Hello 331dot, thank you for your work reviewing New Pages!

Backlog

As of 21 October 2018^[update], there are 3650 unreviewed articles and the backlog now stretches back 51 days.

Community Wishlist Proposal

There is currently an ongoing discussion regarding the drafting of a Community Wishlist Proposal for the purpose of requesting bug fixes and missing/useful features to be added to the New Page Feed and Curation Toolbar.
Please join the conversation as we only have until 29 October to draft this proposal!

Project updates

ORES predictions are now built-in to the feed. These automatically predict the class of an article as well as whether it may be spam, vandalism, or an attack page, and can be filtered by these criteria now allowing reviewers to better target articles that they prefer to review.
There are now tools being tested to automatically detect copyright violations in the feed. This detector may not be accurate all the time, though, so it shouldn't be relied on 100% and will only start working on new revisions to pages, not older pages in the backlog.

New scripts

User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js^(info) — A new script created for quickly placing {{copyvio-revdel}} on a page.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article Andy Overall

Dear 331dot, I have now added independent sources (book reviews & websource) regarding the person. Could you please let me know if there is still anything amiss. Thanks Shroomkin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shroomkin (talk • contribs) 07:44, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Shroomkin: Looking at the article, I see a song by one of his bands charted, but that would only mean the band would merit an article, not any of its individual members. I'm still not certain he meets the notability criteria for music. Looking at the sources, one is an interview with him, two are press announcements, and one is a simple directory listing. None of these(which are primary sources) are acceptable for establishing notability. The best source there is the Telegraph piece describing his work with mushrooms, which might establish he is notable as a mycologist if there was any more like that. There is no deadline, however, so feel free to keep looking. 331dot (talk) 10:19, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse protection

Did you intend the protection on WP:TH to be full protection, or did you intend semi? At present, none of us mortals can revert the vandalism in the last 2 sections on the page, nor can we reply to existing questions. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:56, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I intended semi, I think I misread something. Thank you very much for catching my gross error. 331dot (talk) 12:59, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I am not sure what this is about, but you should probably delete (and revdel) the last two sections of the Teahouse. The current version accuses someone of being a child abuser and contains gibberish.

Furthermore, fullpro on the Teahouse is surely counterproductive, given the page. Wouldn't a semipro be enough? (And that is already maybe too much...) Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 12:59, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BarberVintageMotorsportsMuseum username block

Hi 331dot! I had a conversation with User talk:BarberVintageMotorsportsMuseum, who you blocked for spam/username, on IRC today – the log is on the user talk page. The user has agreed to follow PAID and COI, and to refrain from editing the company's page (and only use edit requests). Would you have any objections to an unblock after the user is renamed to "kshawn246"? Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 02:59, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, 331dot. You have new messages at Foxnpichu's talk page.
Message added 14:26, 29 October 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Hi 3, I think the block on Foxnpichu is a mistake. Would you please read my note on their talk page? Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:26, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Guineapig2500

Hello , I have just submitted an edit request for Harry Kane . But no one's answering . Could you help me ? Thanks ! Guineapig2500 (talk) 15:44, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A cheeseburger for you!

In appreciation Guineapig2500 (talk) 17:56, 30 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry

It is likely that Bro Dude51 (talk · contribs) is back [9]. I have started a sockpuppet investigation [10].--Jetstreamer ^Talk 16:57, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2018).

Administrator changes

Sir Sputnik

Kudpung • Liz • Lourdes

Everyking • Jackmcbarn

Interface administrator changes

Dinoguy1000

CheckUser changes

AGK • Ivanvector • Stwalkerster • TonyBallioni

Oversight changes

Amorymeltzer • Oshwah • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93

Keilana

Guideline and policy news

A request for comment determined that non-administrators will not be able to request interface admin access.
A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the Mediation Committee should be closed and marked as historical.
A village pump discussion has been ongoing about whether the proposed deletion policy (PROD) should be clarified or amended.
A request for comment is in progress to determine whether pending changes protection should be applied automatically to today's featured article (TFA) in order to mitigate a recent trend of severe image vandalism.

Technical news

Partial blocks is now available for testing on the Test Wikipedia. The new functionality allows you to block users from editing specific pages. Bugs may exist and can be reported on the local talk page or on Meta. A discussion regarding deployment to English Wikipedia will be started by community liaisons sometime in the near future.
A user script is now available to quickly review unblock requests.
The 2019 Community Wishlist Survey is now accepting new proposals until November 11, 2018. The results of this survey will determine what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year. Voting on the proposals will take place from November 16 to November 30, 2018. Specifically, there is a proposal category for admins and stewards that may be of interest.

Arbitration

Eligible editors will be invited to nominate themselves as candidates in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 4 until November 13. Voting will begin on November 19 and last until December 2.
The Arbitration Committee's email address has changed to arbcom-enwikimedia.org. Other email lists, such as functionaries-en and clerks-l, remain unchanged.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:18, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi, just out of curiosity, wouldn't someone like this usually get that light blue "softer block"? I only ask based on the outcome of previous UAA reports, and I'm the one that filed this UAA. Obviously their username needs to be changed, but the few edits they made were improvements (even if there was a COI). This editor seemed to have good intentions, I wouldn't want to see them chased of for a mistake. Thanks - wolf 06:23, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's a judgement call, but in some cases with a soft block the user creates a new name without reading WP:COI or WP:PAID when they should, for whatever reason(usually because they are not aware they have a user talk page). I wanted the user to read both those policies since they seem to be a representative of that military command/office. 331dot (talk) 08:28, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bilal Abbas Khan

Hello admin, Sorry for the disturbance. Actually Bilal Abbas Khan was created by me as an IP editor at Draft:Bilal Abbas Khan, it was deleted and again created by IP but a one liner. Where its history gone? i just edit wikipidea after a months and found my worked and expansions to that article was vanished. Will you please do something. That person is pretty notable now and deserves this platform, also please check [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17]. 119.160.118.117 (talk) 15:09, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:311dot

Do you suggest we block this one? It's clearly aiming to pass off as you I suspect... -- Longhair\^talk 15:10, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I turned his userpage into a redirect to 331dot's page, btw. funplussmart (talk) 15:39, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked it. -- Longhair\^talk 15:40, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm starting to think that the user just so happened to choose a username that resembled 331dot's. The only edit he made, while not helpful, did seem to be made in good faith. I think we should unblock him on the condition that he change his username. funplussmart (talk) 00:43, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with that. -- Longhair\^talk 00:45, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Thanks for reviewing Arunachal Pradesh women's cricket team, 331dot.

Unfortunately Boleyn has just gone over this page again and unreviewed it. Their note is:

This needs further tagging (it's uncategorised and a stub) and consideration for draftspace.

To reply, leave a comment on Boleyn's talk page.

Boleyn (talk) 19:00, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]