Jump to content

User talk:Bilby/Archive 12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.144.96.24 (talk) 22:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply] 

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.   Thank you. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.14.25.33 (talk) 19:38, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Merry Christmas!

[edit]

BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :) BOZ (talk) 18:53, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 December 2015

[edit]

Paolo Petrocelli

[edit]

Hi Bilby! Thank you for your clarification on the Paolo Petrocelli article. Your proposition for the article to be independently checked sounds right to me, the issue is that the COI notice has been there since August 2015, and nobody has checked it since! Can you please advice on how we may get the article reviewed by other editors now that I've tried to abide it to Wikipedia's requirements? - Japancolours (talk) 07:10, 27 January 2016

Alexia Parks

[edit]

I noticed you deleted the Alexia Parks article under WP:G5. As you know, G5 applies to pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and "that have no substantial edits by others". I had no idea this article had been created by a banned user, and made significant improvements to the article yesterday. Also, the article's creator, Coreyeymmote (talk · contribs), doesn't appear to be banned? Are you in error? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 02:26, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! The Coreyeymmote account was a sock created by User:LogAntiLog, who has been creating large numbers of accounts to engage in paid and promotional editing over an extended period. The Alexia Parks article was the result of paid editing in violation of the existing block on the master account. I did look at your edits, but as all were tagged as minor copyedits, I didn't feel that they reached the level of substantial. I also noticed that you had raised concerns about the coverage of the subject, which I took into consideration. - Bilby (talk) 03:01, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I looked over the sources before making my edits. The article likely would have made it through an AfD. I hate paid editing as much as the rest, but the article had merit. Magnolia677 (talk) 03:38, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I should have been clearer. Could you please revert your deletion of Alexia Parks. I had made significant improvements to the article before you deleted it. Thank again. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:49, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that the edits were significant - they were marked as minor by you. However, I'll have a look - if the sources are enough to warrant reverting I will, but my feeling is that I'll have to send it to AfD. I'm a bit caught up at the moment, but I'll be able to look at this over the next couple of days or so. - Bilby (talk) 21:01, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No rush. I came across the article when it was added as a link to a city article. I felt it was worth improving and made several edits. I'd hate to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 06 January 2016

[edit]

The Signpost: 13 January 2016

[edit]

User: NihartouJason

[edit]

Hi I would like to draw your attention to the user contributions - NihartouJasonyu. I think he's one of the side of previous wars in article Frederick Achom. he sent the same messages to 14 users to discussion page. I worry about that, because I'm a little upgrated Achom's page, and it's was deleted. by the way, page was nominated for the deletion today (19.01). it's like vandalism: contributions only about Frederick and deletion section in AppyParking: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=AppyParking&diff=700414338&oldid=693803491 thanks.--27century (talk) 16:37, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have done everything according to wikipedia's policy. Whatever changes were made to the page were first discussed on the article's talk page and whatever changes I made the reasons for them are given here Talk:Frederick_Achom/sandbox. I even asked admin User:Jeff_G. to check my work once, only after he went through it, I ported the page to the main article space. Also the deletion tag was put by another admin User:Mdann52 which was resolved because I had written a much neutral article. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Frederick_Achom Thank You NihartouJason (talk) 05:44, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I am not an admin here.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 06:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 January 2016

[edit]

The Signpost: 27 January 2016

[edit]

The Signpost: 03 February 2016

[edit]

The Signpost: 10 February 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:28, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What is your evidence that scholarship - a merit-based award - is not overwhelmingly a U.S. phenomenon?

[edit]

deisenbe (talk) 22:28, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, what you wrote was that scholarships are unique to the US. This is false. I'd also need a source before I accepted "overwhelmingly", as this seems like a very strong claim given the huge numbers of scholarships available around the world. - Bilby (talk) 22:56, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What is your evidence that there are "huge numbers" of scholarships - merit-based awards - around the world? I worked for 2004-2010 full time in college financial aid (see Edifi), have traveled abroad extensively, including during this period, and speak several foreign languages. It's news to me. There are other kinds of financial aid available, but those are mostly grants (need-based awards). A bursary (U.K.) is a grant, not a scholarship. deisenbe (talk) 12:43, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm finding this to be an odd discussion. Scholarships are common outside of the US - a quick search will turn up thousands in the UK, Europe and Australia. Not to mention places such as China, South-East Asia, and Africa. But if you can turn up a source saying hat scholarships are unique to the US, I'll be interested to see what it has to say. - Bilby (talk) 12:52, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well I went to google and searched for scholarships England, France, and Italy. What is clear is that the word scholarship is used differently outside the U.S., and is used there to mean what in the U.S.are called grants. I also went to a portal, http://becas.universia.es, that claims to have in one place information on all the schokarships available in Spain. At the undergraduate level there were a total of five, four for study abroad and one that is arguably a scholarship as the word is used in the U.S. (a merit-based award), for music students from a particular province.
I'm going to copy this to the talk page of the article. deisenbe (talk) 13:14, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 February 2016

[edit]

Precious anniversary

[edit]
Four years ago ...
reviewing eyes
... you were recipient
no. 31 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:13, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Five years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:57, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 February 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:04, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

VisualEditor News #1—2016

[edit]

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

Did you know?
Among experienced editors, the visual editor's table editing is one of the most popular features.
Screenshot showing a pop-up menu for column operations in a table
If you select the top of a column or the end of a row, you can quickly insert and remove columns and rows.

Now, you can also rearrange columns and rows. Click "Move before" or "Move after" to swap the column or row with its neighbor.

You can read and help translate the user guide, which has more information about how to use the visual editor.

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor Team has fixed many bugs. Their workboard is available in Phabricator. Their current priorities are improving support for Japanese, Korean, Arabic, Indic, and Han scripts, and improving the single edit tab interface.

Recent changes

[edit]

You can switch from the wikitext editor to the visual editor after you start editing. This function is available to nearly all editors at most wikis except the Wiktionaries and Wikisources.

Many local feedback pages for the visual editor have been redirected to mw:VisualEditor/Feedback.

You can now re-arrange columns and rows in tables, as well as copying a row, column or any other selection of cells and pasting it in a new location.

The formula editor has two options: you can choose "Quick edit" to see and change only the LaTeX code, or "Edit" to use the full tool. The full tool offers immediate preview and an extensive list of symbols.

Future changes

[edit]

The single edit tab project will combine the "Edit" and "Edit source" tabs into a single "Edit" tab. This is similar to the system already used on the mobile website. (T102398) Initially, the "Edit" tab will open whichever editing environment you used last time. Your last editing choice will be stored as an account preference for logged-in editors, and as a cookie for logged-out users. Logged-in editors will have these options in the Editing tab of Special:Preferences:

  • Remember my last editor,
  • Always give me the visual editor if possible,
  • Always give me the source editor, and
  • Show me both editor tabs.  (This is the state for people using the visual editor now.)

The visual editor uses the same search engine as Special:Search to find links and files. This search will get better at detecting typos and spelling mistakes soon. These improvements to search will appear in the visual editor as well.

The visual editor will be offered to all editors at most "Phase 6" Wikipedias during the next few months. The developers would like to know how well the visual editor works in your language. They particularly want to know whether typing in your language feels natural in the visual editor. Please post your comments and the language(s) that you tested at the feedback thread on mediawiki.org. This will affect the following languages: Japanese, Korean, Urdu, Persian, Arabic, Tamil, Marathi, Malayalam, Hindi, Bengali, Assamese, Thai, Aramaic and others.

Let's work together

[edit]

If you aren't reading this in your favorite language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thanks!

– Whatamidoing (WMF) 17:46, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist

[edit]

Hi Bilby! I know you are technically savvy and watch a large number of articles, so maybe you have a neat solution to this problem: if an article I'm watching is edited by someone and shortly afterwards by a bot (quite frequent at the moment), the fact of the human edit is masked — I get no notification. Unless I also watch for bot edits and check each occurrence; soul-destroying and usually fruitless. Doug butler (talk) 22:12, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in Education: [March 2016]

[edit]

Arab World Education Program at WISE Doha 2015

By Walaa Abdel Manaem (Wikipedia Education Program Egypt) & (Egypt Wikimedians user group)

Walaa with Mr. Rashid El Telwaty and Ms. Suad Alhalwachi
Walaa with Dr. Sherifa Atallah
Walaa with Mr. Rashid El Telwaty, Ms. Bonnie Chiu, Mr. Jake and Ms. Naadiya Moosajee.

Snippet: Education Leaders at WISE Doha 2015 introducing Wikipedia Education Program in Egypt to WISE Conference attendees, as an example of a program in the Arab World, to share their experience to inspire other universities and institutions starting new programs in the area.

WISE 2015 Sessions and Plenaries were designed around three main pillars such as the UN Sustainable Development Goals; education and the economy; fostering innovation in education systems. Each pillar examined a variety of key topics including: the linkages between education, employment, and entrepreneurship; education reform and innovation in the MENA region and Qatar; emerging models of education financing, attracting, rewarding and retaining quality teachers; and the importance of investing in early childhood development.

Representatives of Wikipedia Education Program Walaa Abdel Manaem and Reem Al-Kashif participated in WISE Doha 2015 in Qatar, the annual World Innovation Summit for Education is the premier international platform dedicated to innovation and creative action in education where top decision-makers share insights with on-the-ground practitioners and collaborate to rethink education. Also, WISE 2015 was the first global education conference following the ratification of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in September 2015. Contributions ranged from Arabic Brochure of Editing Wikipedia for students in WEP in Egypt and everybody who would like to edit Wikipedia without ‎problems, The Arabic version of Welcome to Wikipedia reference guideline, PDF of brochure handed out during Arabic Wikipedia Convening, Doha, Qatar, 2011 and Introduction to Wikipedia. These contributions are related to show a case study of Wikipedia Education program in Egypt and how it worked since February 2012 till the November 2015, as the seventh edition ended last October. All discussions were about the program's mechanism and what were the motivations keeping it going. The program helped increasing gender diversity and supported the featured content on Arabic Wikipedia. Wikipedia Education Program, like any other initiative, has achievements and dark sides, for that reason, the representatives had to locate both of them and how they influence the Arabic community and how the community interact with this phenomenon.


Read more about the Wikipedia Education Program in Egypt here.

Read more about the Wikipedia Education program in the Arab World here (in Arabic).

Wikipedia in Higher Education in Israel: A new for-credit elective course focusing on contributing to Wikipedia at Tel Aviv University

By Shani Evenstein (WMIL)

Amir explains about the new translation tool to students

Snippet: A first-of-its-kind, for-credit, elective course that focuses on contributing to Wikipedia has opened at Tel Aviv University and is now available to all B.A. students on campus

On October 19th a new for-credit elective course called "Wikipedia: Skills for producing and consuming knowledge"[1] has opened at Tel Aviv University (TAU). The semester-long course (13 weeks) is available to all B.A. students on campus and this semester about 50 students from various disciplines are taking part in this first-of-its-kind course in Israel.

Working in small groups to correct copyrights and Non-NPOV violations

The course draws from "flipped classroom" concepts and uses "blended learning" methods, which practically means combining in-class lectures, workshops and small-group activities, as well as online individual learning. Both the Moodle learning management system (LMS) and the Wikipedia Education Extension are used to monitor the students' work and progress throughout the course.

The course has 2 main assignments - expanding an existing stub, as well as writing a new article, in the hopes that the content added during the course will assist not only the students themselves, but also future generations of learners as well as the general public. Though the course focuses on adding quality content to Wikipedia, it also aims to help students sharpen their academic skills and their 21st century skills, highlighting collaborative learning, joint online research and interdisciplinary collaborations in the process of constructing knowledge.

This course was initiated and is led by Shani Evenstein, an educator, Wikimedian and member of the Wikipedia Education Collaborative, in collaboration with the Orange Institute for Internet Studies, as well as the School of Education at TAU. The syllabus for the new course builds on the success of Wiki-Med, a for-credit elective course, which was designed in 2013 and is led by Evenstein at the Sackler school of Medicine for the third consecutive year. While Wiki-med is focused on contributing medical content to Wikipedia and is only available to Medical Students on campus, the new course is designed to accommodate students from different academic disciplines and varying backgrounds.

The course was chosen to be part of TAU's cross-discipline elective courses system ("Kelim Shluvim") and was approved by the Vice-Rector, who heads the program. In that, the course marks an important precedent in the collaboration between Academia and the Wikipedia Education Program, as it is the first time a higher institution acknowledges the importance of a course focusing on Wikipedia on a university level, offering it to all students, rather than a faculty level or individual lecturers as mostly practiced. It is our hope that other higher education institutions will follow this example and offer similar courses to students both in Israel and around the world.

Read more about the Wikipedia Education Program in Israel here.

References

  1. ^ Link to the course page at the TAU website (in Hebrew) - http://www2.tau.ac.il/yedion/syllabus.asp?course=1880180101&year=2015

The collaborative production in open educational environments: Is Wikipedia an answer?

By Melina Masnatta, Wikimedia Argentina

Snippet: University professors become Wikipedians in an online course during just a week.

How to be a Wikipedian in a week (educactional MOOC for university professors)

Educators with different profiles and from different latin america countries, but most of them professors at the University of Buenos Aires (UBA) from different faculties, have just participated in the online training and free course "Educational scenarios with technology. Among the real and the possible" organized by the Center for Innovation in Technology and Pedagogy (CITEP) of this university.

Different educational activities were carried out simultaneously. During the week and under the topic “Open movement”, Wikimedia Argentina participated with three different proposals: starting with an interview of Patricio Lorente accompanied with a short text to know more about the movement. To make an immersive experience we designed " Knowing Wikipedia by first-hand or Wikipedia in the first person" to work directly on the platform translating articles from english to spanish from a list created especially for that purpose. Along with this specific proposal, educators participated in a videoconference with Galileo Vidoni (available in Spanish), where participants could talk and learn more about how are the first steps to become a Wikipedian and the importance of the movement at the local and regional level.

A professor´s educational experience with Wikipedia explained with a tweet. He said: "I´m translating, enjoying and learning with Wikipedia". Know more experiences on Storify.

With only seven days and without being mandatory, different educators discovered how to edit on Wikipedia, indeed many of them mentioned that they had it as a pending to learn and participate on the free encyclopedia, but never had the time or the real chance. The enthusiasm was also present on social networks, where they shared the experience with the hashtag #escenariostec.

The result

More than 100 educators got involved and exchanged their experience in an online forum with more of 280 messages that reflected their learning process while experiencing with the activity. 80 of them were new users, and they created 61 new articles in spanish. An important fact: 78 of them were women, which means that working with educators is a key issue to continue closing the digital gender gap.

Finally from CITEP, they shared the following insights regarding the question that ran through all the activities that took place during the week dedicated to the open movement. Some thoughts can be sum up as follows:

The collaborative production in open environments: chaos or construction? (...) For the teacher also means accepting new challenges: encourage students to produce knowledge in an environment of divergent nature, it requires permanent operations and convergence. In a space that fosters interventions unmarked, the teacher needs to frame depending on the purpose of education and teaching purposes. (…) Wikipedia is the best example of the challenges posed by the digital era in the educational field, it forces us to rethink the relationship between technology and the production of knowledge and allows us to confirm that the collaborative work does not lead to chaos, if not to the construction. (. ..) [Authors: Angeles Solectic and Miri Latorre]

We share some of the voices of the protagonists in social networks with storify (available in Spanish). Read more about the Wikipedia Education Program in Argentina here.

Collaboration with Masaryk University turns official

By Vojtěch Dostál (Wikimedia Czech Republic)

Masaryk University employees are being trained in using and editing Wikipedia
Marek Blahuš, Wikipedian in residence at Masaryk University

Snippet: The second largest university in the Czech Republic has employed a Wikipedian in residence, leading to a boom of Wikimedia activities in the city of Brno.

Collaboration between Wikipedia and Czech institutions has always been a priority for Wikimedia Czech Republic, but the year 2015 has taken this to another level. First, an official memorandum of collaboration with the National Heritage Institute (NPÚ) was signed in May 2015, to be followed by official collaboration with Masaryk University in Brno (the second largest city and university in the Czech Republic), which was contracted in November 2015. In fact, Wikimedia activities in Brno have been blooming for several years now, mainly as a result of the community's own development, but aided substantially by the external interest in Wikipedia by Masaryk University alumni society, demonstrated as early as March 2013.

In February 2015, the university employed one of the most experienced Czech Wikipedians – Marek Blahuš (Blahma) – who was appointed to become the university's first "Wikipedian in residence". Marek Blahuš has been in the center of the Wikimedia community in Brno for about two years, organizing regular Wikipedia meetups, the 2014 edition of the annual WikiConference (more in English here) and creating the Czech-Slovak Wikipedia translation tool, which has famously led to the creation of >9000 articles on Czech and Slovak Wikipedias (more in English here). His current work as Wikipedian in residence is funded by Masaryk University and runs under the patronage of Wikimedia Czech Republic as well as Masaryk University's rector Mikuláš Bek.

Since February, Wikipedia has taken a prominent role within Masaryk University. Marek Blahuš started a "Masaryk University Wikipedians team", gathering local Wikipedians and facilitating contacts with the university, aided by his status of a graduate and current employee in its language center. Articles about Masaryk University alumni and faculties have been identified and improved after consultations with Masaryk University archives and libraries which provided helpful resources. Wikipedia citation templates can now be directly generated from the university's on-line archive of theses. In September, a public conference called "Masaryk University Is Getting High on Wikipedia" took place on university grounds, featuring the experienced Wikipedian Jan Sokol (Sokoljan), who is a philosopher, university teacher and a former presidential candidate. The talks focused on the use of Wikipedia in university education, in line with the successful Czech "Students Write Wikipedia" program. One of the teachers, Jiří Rambousek, expressed his desire to organize a Wikipedia Club as a regular meetup where articles would be improved in a collaborative effort and new editors introduced to Wikipedia.

The program is actively preparing for 2016 when we expect Wikimedia Czech Republic to take a more active role in overseeing the initiatives as well as the creation of a position of a "Wikipedian in Brno" – person officially in charge of the wide array of Wikimedia activities happening in the city. The chapter's annual plan includes initiatives to increase the number of university courses which incorporate Wikipedia into the curriculum, public presentations of Wikipedia at various events, scanning and uploading of images from institutional and personal archives, and much more. Let's wish that our plans come true!

Read more about the Wikipedia Education Program in the Czech Republic here.

Wiki expeditions, animation clips about alebrijes and more at the Tec de Monterrey in Mexico

By Leigh Thelmadatter (Wiki Learning-Tec de Monterrey)

Group photo of Reto Wikimedia participants at Tec de Monterrey, Mexico City Campus

Snippet: Student participation is more than just text!

For the Fall 2015 Wiki Learning-Tec de Monterrey held two wiki expeditions in Mexico City and began a collaboration with the Museo de Arte Popular. We also received our first grant!

Wiki expeditions

[edit]

The 32-campus Tec de Monterrey system has each semester an event called "Semana i" (i Week), when students forego normal classes for an entire week to work on challenging projects called "retos." For the Mexico City and Santa Fe campuses, one option for students was to work with Wikimedia, with the aptly named projects "Reto Wikimedia." Both campuses opted to do wiki-expeditions to different parts of Mexico City. The Mexico City campus had the larger group with almost 90 students registered, who covered the two southern boroughs of Xochimilco and Tlalpan. The Santa Fe group had 35 participants, and covered the San Ángel neighborhood found not far from this campus.

Both campus took photos of landmarks with the Mexico City campus also focusing on photos of everyday life in the south of the city. The Mexico City campus tallied 5264 photos, 8 videos and 36 articles, including articles related to the area into French, Swedish and Danish. The Santa Fe group tallied 605 photos, and ten articles in Spanish on landmarks in San Ángel.

In addition, the Mexico City campus had a special speaker the borough chronicler of Xochmilco, Sebastián Flores Farfán. A short montage video of the event is in the works.

Some student photos:

Some video clips of the event:

[edit]
Animation about alebrijes

Wikiservicio, students working with Wikimedia for their community service requirement, added a new component. To attract more students and encourage more students to do all of their community service hours with Wikimedia, a collaboration was set up with the Museo de Arte Popular (MAP)... the first of many we hope! Six students from the digital art and animation major (see last newsletter) have continued working with Wikimedia, but focusing their efforts in creating short animation clips in relation to the mission of promoting and preserving Mexican folk art. One clip has been completed and can be see to the right of this text. So far, the video has subtitles in English, German, French and Punjabi. A second clip is nearing completion at the time of this writing.

Classes and Wikimetrics

[edit]

Fifteen students completed work with Wikiservicio doing translations, writing new articles and doing photography projects. As of this date, 7 have indicated interest in working with Wikiservicio on campus and another six with MAP.

Five university level classes and one high school class on the Mexico City (South) campus have had projects, all in writing and translation, with some video work.

Wikimetrics for the semester are:

According to Wikimetrics tool....

  • 9,589,918 bytes to Spanish Wikipedia
  • 3,098 edits to the mainspace of Spanish Wikipedia
  • 367 pages created in the mainspace of Spanish Wikipedia

Manual count

  • 302 student and teacher participants
  • 281 Spanish Wikipedia articles created or expanded
  • 6,057 photographs
  • 10 videos
  • 9 articles in English Wikipedia
  • 2 articles in French Wikipedia
  • 1 article in Swedish Wikipedia
  • 1 article in Danish Wikipedia

First grant Wiki Learning received its first grant from the Wikimedia Foundation. The long-term goal of this grant is to establish a system for financing Wiki Learning. The grant, which totals a modest 12,500 Mexican pesos, will be used for swag, such as t shirts, stickers, buttons, etc, especially for Semana i activities and promotion of wiki activities to other campus. The money will also be used for incidental travel expenses, especially for projects needing to move expensive camera equipment.

Read more about the Wikipedia Education Program in Mexico here.

Wikimedia Argentina, about the global and local in the digital and academic communities

By Christian Cariño (Wikimedia México) and Melina Masnatta (Wikimedia Argentina)

Wikipedia Education Program in Argentina

Snippet: Aprender para Educar writes about Wikipedia Education Program in Argentina.

The digital free magazine Aprender para Educar (Learning to educate) of the National Technological University (UTN) is recognized in the community of education and technology in Argentina to write about innovation issues in Spanish, which is not common in the academic dissemination and teacher training field.

Cristina Velazquez, general editor of the magazine invited Wikimedia Argentina to write an article that generally describes their activities in the Education Program, after reading the proposal she decided to publish it as the main article of the 12th edition.

To describe the education program, WMAR wrote two notes completing one another, as doing a zoom: from the local to the global and from the global to the local, showing how a movement of this magnitude does not stand alone, it is part of a huge network.

Melina Masnatta, education manager in WMAR and Patricio Lorente, chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees wrote those two notes.The first one focuses on the Education Program, implementation, challenges and obstacles that they had at the beginning, plans to integrate it into the classrooms in Argentina and how different Wikimedia Projects are also relevant in education. The most important thing, Melina adds, is to strengthen the values that inspire them, show how the free culture give meaning to education in general and digital culture in particular.

Meanwhile in the second part, Lorente focuses on the global movement, the community pillars, the agenda of today's challenges and the effort of their volunteers as protagonists. It is not easy show the world what drives us and why we work as volunteers in different countries. In education very few people understand the value of building free knowledge. There is still a great prejudice or negative perceptions of Wikipedia in the classroom because teachers ignore how Wikipedia is built.

Everybody reads Wikipedia, but few people edit it. We can change this fact by spreading in spaces such as the Journal of the UTN and inviting more people to collaborate and be the protagonist of this huge collective work for humanity.

Read more about the Wikipedia Education Program in Argentina here.

Online ambassador played a prominent role in helping Egyptian students to nominate their excellent content

By Walaa Abdel Manaem (Wikipedia Education Program Egypt) & (Egypt Wikimedians user group)

Bassem Fleifel

Snippet: Online ambassador helped spanish students course in Cairo University to nominate their articles, scoring an exceptional record of WEP excellent content.

Bassem Fleifel, an online ambassador of Cairo university spanish course, played a prominent role to help all students to encourage them to nominate their excellent content to be a featured and good articles in Arabic Wikipedia. Those articles are History of bread (Featured article); Walt Disney; Daniel Radcliffe; Al-Andalus; Poet in New York; and Popol Vuh.

The seventh term, the program started in Cairo University with promoting posts on Wikipedia and social media websites to help new participants understand the general idea of the program as well as holding meetings with professors from the departments of History, chinese, English language and Spanish language. Walaa Abdel Manaem (program leader in Cairo University) and Bassem Fleifel (online ambassador) have held some workshops in campus and online for the whole students to teach them "How to edit Wikipedia". On the other hand, Prof. Abeer Abdel-Hafiz has exerted great efforts with her students in addition to introducing Walaa to new classes of senior students for whom she has organized general seminars about Wikipedia and the education program. At the same time Walaa was assigning her Spanish department students of the first and second year to edit Wikipedia.

This term, Prof. Abeer let the chance to her students to choose any articles they would like to translate from the Spanish Wikipedia to the Arabic Wikipedia or working on articles about history. They already have chosen some articles to translate with the target of nominating them to be a featured and good articles.

Most of students worked on articles about different topics like history, writers, actors, history of food and drink, mayan literature, islam and politics, etc. This course itself achieved an exceptional record of Wikipedia Education program excellent content and the best term ever in the history of WEP in Egypt in general and in the Faculty of Arts, Cairo University in specific. Walaa has held 2 online webinars to follow up with her students in addition to the workshops held at the campus. Regarding numbers, 38 students joined this course, of which 35 are female and 3 are male students. They worked on 1748 articles adding more than 12,282,943 million bytes to the article namespace on the Arabic Wikipedia, with the help of the online ambassador, who also participated as a student.

See the course page of this group on the Arabic Wikipedia here.

Full statistics of WEP in Egypt the first term in 2012 till the seventh term in 2015 which include numbers of created articles, featured and good articles, featured portals and lists.

Read more about the Wikipedia Education Program in Egypt here.

Norwegian Masters students in History and Archeology twists their brains on Wikipedia

By Jorid Martinsen (Wikimedia Norge)

Jorid Martinsen teaching students at the University of Oslo about Wikipedia.

Snippet: This fall masters students in History and Archeology at the University of Oslo take on the task of Wikipedia editing as one of the main parts in a subject on communication of History.

The University of Oslo is Norway’s largest higher education institution, and it is the first time Wikimedia Norway collaborates with this University in forming and using Wikipedia editing as a integrated part of higher education. The collaboration started by Wikimedia Norway contacting assistant professor John McNicol, who already had gotten some media attention on his eagerness to make students skilled in knowledge sharing.

Starting off with a two hour lecture on the secret world of Wikipedia and a two hour editing workshop in mid-September, and in October the students will evaluate the life of their articles. Has there been many additional edits on their articles? Discussions? Request to delete everything? For Wikimedia Norge it is fun to see the students both engaging in Wikipedia editing and using the ways of Wikipedia to discuss how knowledge is formed.

Read more about the Wikipedia Education Program in Norway here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:26, 1 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]

If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription.

This Month in Education: [March 2016]

[edit]


We apologize for an earlier distribution that mistakenly took on the older content. We hope you enjoy the newest issue of the newsletter we are sharing now.--Sailesh Patnaik (Distribution leader) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:44, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 02 March 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 09 March 2016

[edit]

AN/I input request

[edit]

Hi, There is an AN/I in which my attempts to get admin involvement at [WP:Brian Martin (social scientist)] are being portrayed as disruption. I see that you edited at Brian Martin. [1] Well actually I see you've edited a lot more than that one.

Will you please post your evaluation of the article to the ANI/I https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&action=edit&section=32 AN/I:WP:Brian Martin (social scientist) : other editor is feeling stalked/harassed. And is also attacking me. SmithBlue (talk) 10:36, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 March 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 23 March 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:24, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 April 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
For The Dresden Files (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Good job. Guy (Help!) 10:03, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do you want one Edit tab, or two? It's your choice

[edit]
How to switch between editing environments
Part of the toolbar in the visual editor
Click the [[ ]] to switch to the wikitext editor.
Part of the toolbar in the wikitext editor
Click the pencil icon to switch to the visual editor.

The editing interface will be changed soon. When that happens, editors who currently see two editing tabs – "Edit" and "Edit source" – will start seeing one edit tab instead. The single edit tab has been popular at other Wikipedias. When this is deployed here, you may be offered the opportunity to choose your preferred appearance and behavior the next time you click the Edit button. You will also be able to change your settings in the Editing section of Special:Preferences.

You can choose one or two edit tabs. If you chose one edit tab, then you can switch between the two editing environments by clicking the buttons in the toolbar (shown in the screenshots). See Help:VisualEditor/User guide#Switching between the visual and wikitext editors for more information and screenshots.

There is more information about this interface change at mw:VisualEditor/Single edit tab. If you have questions, suggestions, or problems to report, then please leave a note at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback.

Whatamidoing (WMF) 19:22, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 April 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:46, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

William J. Kelly and Lauraglaw

[edit]

I think that I know the answer to this, and we are both experienced neutral editors (although you have the mop and I don't), but I am asking anyway. It appears that you twice deleted William J. Kelly as the creation of a blocked or banned user. User Lauraglaw has said at the Teahouse (not pinging her on purpose because I have pinged her on her own page), essentially, that it was very important to her to get the above article and to make sure it was neutral and well-sourced, so she hired a paid editor for the purpose. What I am assuming, based on the deletion history (and I can't see the deleted articles), is that the paid editor was already blocked for being a paid editor, and that they created the article twice, each time using a sockpuppet, and each time it was deleted. (We know that articles can only be created by registered users, so it wasn't created logged out, so an article is only created by a blocked or banned user (already blocked or banned) if it was created by a sockpuppet.) Is that correct? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:36, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Now the only missing piece, looking at it from my side, is why Lauraglaw found it so important to get the article created that she was willing to pay a paid editor to write it. (You and I know that paying someone to write an article so that it will be neutral and well-sourced is nonsense. Paid editors write non-neutral articles, either obviously non-neutral, or, if they are smart, subtly non-neutral.) I have asked her to make the conflict of interest disclosure. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:36, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The account which created the article was a User:LogAntiLog sock, who has been doing paid editing for some time. LogAntiLog was running a sockfarm to prevent his edits from being detected, and then continued to do so after being blocked. He continues to take jobs on some of the freelance websites, and this was presumably one of those. Unfortunately, while I don';t know the situation as to this particular arrangement, a number of blocked and banned editors do this, are I presume that they aren't explaining to their clients what their situation is on Wikipedia.
It looks like the subject is running for Mayor, which might explain his wish to have an article. Although the sourcing on the last one was week, and it might have been tight at AfD (especially as at lease one reference seems to be false, and a few are very questionable), I don't have a problem with a new version if they someone can solve the sourcing issues. - Bilby (talk) 02:32, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Do you know where the subject is running for Mayor of? Presumably it isn't a large city, or they would likely be able to satisfy general notability guidelines with press coverage of their campaign. It also clarifies the statement that they wanted to article to be neutral and well-sourced, which means not what it says, but that they wanted the article to look neutral and well-sourced while being promotional (rather than being such promotional hooey that it would get G11). So it is as I thought, that we have a banned paid editor who is socking. I had not heard of LogAntiLog, but with more than 12,000 sockmasters, I wouldn't know of most of them. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:33, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Chicago, I think, although the election seems not to have started yet. There's bit online about them from previous efforts, but not much - it looks like they may have been a bit on the fringe of the elections, and didn't get media attention. Perhaps there will be more this time. I'll look around and see what I can find. - Bilby (talk) 02:37, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Visibility Changes

[edit]

Is there any simple way to find the number of visibility changes that have been made to a page? Thanks! MarkBernstein (talk) 17:05, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I know of, I'm afraid. Visibility changes are logged, though, so the page log will show them. However, if there's been a lot of visibility changes there is also a lot of protection changes, so the log gets hard to read very quickly. - Bilby (talk) 02:43, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) This[2] may be that which is sought. There is likely a way to filter to show only the revdels. Not sure if oversights show in the list. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 03:20, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'd like to know whether this includes or excludes Oversight actions, MarkBernstein (talk) 13:22, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can look at the log for the page and select the option for "Deletion log" (like this for this page). An admin/CUers can see which rev deletions have been suppressed/oversighted from those which haven't but they need to look at each edit to see. For example, on the original Zoe Quinn article, there are many rev deletions, some of which were later oversighted but not all were. So, yes, the deletion log includes Oversight actions but they are not distinguishable from normal rev deletions to regular admins. So, to know how many edits were oversighted, an editor who have to find an admin/CUer who'd be willing to check for them and give them a number. Also, as far as I can see, an edit that has been suppressed does not reveal which oversighter suppressed it, if that is a concern. There is probably attribution in some Oversight log which is not visible to the rest of us but it doesn't say anything in the page history. Liz Read! Talk! 14:21, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 April 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

rss feed of wikimedia.org.au blog broken

[edit]

Hello,

you have been mentioned on a ticket in phabricator as a person who might be able to help fixing the RSS feeds on blog.wikimedia.org.au. Would you mind taking a look if that's true? Best regards, Mutante (talk) 04:07, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 2 May 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:08, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit

[edit]

Do you have a copy of the issue? [3] The Master ---)Vote Saxon(--- 13:52, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou, but yes. Unfortunately it doesn't offer much. - Bilby (talk) 14:04, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of List of role-playing game software for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of role-playing game software is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of role-playing game software until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ravenswing 20:28, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Shawn McNulty

[edit]

Shawn McNulty has been recreated. As you previously deleted it only 10 days ago, I thought you might like to be informed.  InsertCleverPhraseHere  04:57, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 May 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Page protection question

[edit]

Hello Bilby, I have just hit undo on a vandal edit on Peter Dutton (again). I noticed you had protected the page so had a look at the help page User access levels but I can't understand how that IP's edit was allowed through. The IP has only made 3 edits, all vandalism. Did the protection not work or am I missing something? Thanks JennyOz (talk) 00:23, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh, now I see it had expired:) JennyOz (talk) 00:47, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've protected it for another two weeks, but I suspect we'll end up having to cover the full election. Thanks for letting me know - I probably would have missed that. - Bilby (talk) 01:20, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you JennyOz (talk) 01:32, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How-to?

[edit]

Hello, What's the first thing an editor is supposed to do when they suspect sockpuppets? I don't want to be UNCIVIL by falsely accusing anyone of anything, but I'm getting sick and tired of the absurd personal attacks you're getting at the Wilyman article. I don't even remember when or why I started following that article, but it's driving me up the wall! Anyway, I've never personally initiated a sockpuppet investigation, so I wanted to make sure all my I's are dotted and T's are crossed before moving forward. Thoughts/advice? —PermStrump(talk) 05:35, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is a bit tricky when someone is using IPs, as we still want to respect their privacy by not connecting their IP to their username. I suspect that the editor has been using an IP on and off, but until now it hasn't been a concern, as they didn't use both the IP and their account in the same debate. That appears to have changed. Nevertheless, I'll keep an eye on it and if it becomes any more of a problem it'll be worth doing an SPI, although I was hoping they'd get the point and pull back. I'm probably being overly optimistic, though. I haven't tried a IP-based SPI before, so I'll check to see if there's anything we should know.
Otherwise, I'm not too worried about things - if I'm stupid enough to edit controversial topics, especially ones which have been dominated by one side of the debate, any attempt to make it neutral is going to be seen as being part of the opposition. :) Too many strong opinions and lines in the sand. It makes things difficult, but I think that the article has improved over recent weeks. - Bilby (talk) 15:10, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Haha ok I will follow your lead and try to be more patient. :-P —PermStrump(talk) 15:36, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bilby ! Thanks for taking time to review two of my newest articles on living people. Saw the signs "The neutrality of this article is disputed" and "article appears to have a close connection with its subject". Need your advice on how to improve them. Have no connection, except the general interest in these areas, and hearing about those subjects in news, so used the information from Google to create the articles. Could you please guide me on what needs to be rewritten/restated/removed/added? Didn't have those issues before, so need help. Thanks--L7starlight (talk) 00:56, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 May 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in Education: [June 2016]

[edit]



If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription.

We hope you enjoy the newest issue of the Education Newsletter.--Sailesh Patnaik (Distribution leader) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:53, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 05 June 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:12, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 June 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

COI

[edit]

I am working on removing promotional content on the pages tagged with COI. Can you please review Patrick Maher (writer) and check if there is still COI? Kavdiamanju (talk) 20:03, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Editing News #2—2016

[edit]

Editing News #2—2016 Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

Did you know?

It's quick and easy to insert a references list.

Screenshot showing a dropdown menu with many items

Place the cursor where you want to display the references list (usually at the bottom of the page). Open the "Insert" menu and click the "References list" icon (three books).

If you are using several groups of references, which is relatively rare, you will have the opportunity to specify the group. If you do that, then only the references that belong to the specified group will be displayed in this list of references.

Finally, click "Insert" in the dialog to insert the References list. This list will change as you add more footnotes to the page.

You can read and help translate the user guide, which has more information about how to use the visual editor.

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor team has fixed many bugs. Their workboard is available in Phabricator. Their current priorities are improving support for Arabic and Indic scripts, and adapting the visual editor to the needs of the Wikivoyages and Wikisources.

Recent changes

[edit]

The visual editor is now available to all users at most Wikivoyages. It was also enabled for all contributors at the French Wikinews.

The single edit tab feature combines the "Edit" and "Edit source" tabs into a single "Edit" tab. It has been deployed to several Wikipedias, including Hungarian, Polish, English and Japanese Wikipedias, as well as to all Wikivoyages. At these wikis, you can change your settings for this feature in the "Editing" tab of Special:Preferences. The team is now reviewing the feedback and considering ways to improve the design before rolling it out to more people.

Future changes

[edit]

The "Save page" button will say "Publish page". This will affect both the visual and wikitext editing systems. More information is available on Meta.

The visual editor will be offered to all editors at the remaining "Phase 6" Wikipedias during the next few months. The developers want to know whether typing in your language feels natural in the visual editor. Please post your comments and the language(s) that you tested at the feedback thread on mediawiki.org. This will affect several languages, including: Arabic, Hindi, Thai, Tamil, Marathi, Malayalam, Urdu, Persian, Bengali, Assamese, Aramaic and others.

The team is working with the volunteer developers who power Wikisource to provide the visual editor there, for opt-in testing right now and eventually for all users. (T138966)

The team is working on a modern wikitext editor. It will look like the visual editor, and be able to use the citoid service and other modern tools. This new editing system may become available as a Beta Feature on desktop devices around September 2016. You can read about this project in a general status update on the Wikimedia mailing list.

Let's work together

[edit]

If you aren't reading this in your preferred language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thank you!

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk), 21:09, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

July 2016

[edit]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jesse Waugh. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

  1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
  2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. The Master ---)Vote Saxon(--- 00:43, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I always find it entertaining when someone notifies me about reverting, and then goes of and reverts the material themselves. :) - Bilby (talk) 01:30, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 July 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:46, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 July 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just a thought

[edit]

You might get less heat if every single edit you made was not sympathetic to Wilyman's fraudulent "science". Drip, drip, drip, constantly watering down criticism and beefing up her special pleading. In as much as Wikipedia has a position on this, it should echo the scientific view, which is that her PhD is drivel. It does not even include an attempt to review the literature to examine whether he her claims of lack of safety are addressed in research within the field. Genuinely, it claims risk, but not only does it not include any reference to papers that directly address the question and find the risk not to exist, it doesn't even acknowledge that such papers might exist. Guy (Help!) 08:52, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that we have no shortage of people willing to add criticism of Wilyman, but we have had a shortage of people willing to balance this. Unfortunately, that means that my focus has had to be on pulling back the more extreme content. As mentioned before, I have no interest in defending the content of her thesis, but that doesn't mean that we have to surrender NPOV and the requirements of BLP. - Bilby (talk) 10:50, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 04 August 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:32, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Beilby Poulden Costello

[edit]

You have recently deleted the page because it was created by a blocked or banner user. However, the subject of the page is notable as per Wikipedia guidelines. If edited with the right case examples and information, the law consultancy firm can have a page of its own. Becktea (talk) 14:33, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the article was deleted under G5 and the creator was also blocked. I don't understand why. The law firm can have a page, if written properly. Gayatri0704 (talk) 09:22, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The law firm can potentially have a page, yes. But it cannot be created by a blocked editor. If they continue to hire blocked editors to create it, the page will need to be deleted again. That said, it will need to be properly sourced and meet the notability requirements. The previous version would likely have been deleted even if it was not created by a blocked editor. - Bilby (talk) 01:33, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zaggora

[edit]

Hi. You previously deleted this article under G5 and also blocked the article's creator. I can't figure out why. A new user (presumably the same person as the one you blocked) created the article again. Can you explain what's going on? Brianga (talk) 19:15, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article was created by a sock of the paid editor User:Alechkoist. Presumably the new user is also a sock, if only because they claim to be the previous editor under a new account. - Bilby (talk) 22:47, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Would you like to take it from here, since you have some experience with these users? Brianga (talk) 17:16, 12 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'll chase it up. :) - Bilby (talk) 01:34, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies

[edit]

Sorry, mate. I confused your reversion with the edit summary from Dumuzid's later re-reversion. :( - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 14:09, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. :) - Bilby (talk) 14:10, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

long time no speak

[edit]

could you email me please? thanks - need to re-contact JarrahTree 01:35, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've sent an email to an address I still have, but I'm not sure if it is current. - Bilby (talk) 02:17, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Tis ok we are in contact JarrahTree 02:40, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 August 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:40, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Userfication of Svetha Venkatesh

[edit]

Would you elaborate on why you moved Svetha Venkatesh to User:Bilby/Svetha Venkatesh? It is highly unusual for someone to userfy a page, not authored by themselves, edited by multiple others, and not as a result of a deletion process. The page needs work, but it can survive in article space, and because it was already there, that is surely the best place for the work to be done. --Worldbruce (talk) 18:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It had been deleted under CSD. I disagree with the decision, but need a few hours to make the changes so that it won't just be deleted again if I leave it in mainspace. So I undeleted it and moved it out of mainspace while the article was fixed, so I could move it straight back once I was done. - Bilby (talk) 18:34, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. Since the version restored was from prior to its tagging for CSD, I didn't think to check the deletion log. Thanks for undertaking to fix it up. Worldbruce (talk) 19:07, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No problems. It seems that it wasn't tagged for CSD anyway - just deleted - which is why that diff isn't there. I'm finding some decent sources on her, and her work is certainly impressive, so it shouldn't take long to make sure that the article will be kept. - Bilby (talk) 02:07, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes

[edit]

They aren't scare quotes, they are quote marks clarifying that this is attribution to Wilyman and not a statement of fact. It's necessary because, as the article makes out, the PhD is not a work of science, and the "suppression" simply amounts to challenging the quality of the work, which is a perfectly legitimate part of academic discourse. Guy (Help!) 13:00, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You know exactly what you are doing with that edit. You don't need quotes around single words unless you are questioning those words. We don't need to do that. This is a description of her claims, and we don't need to make additional commentary. If you would rather I'll change it to a direct quote and we can drop this thing, but what you are doing does not make the article stronger - it makes it less convincing, not more. - Bilby (talk) 13:04, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You need quotes if you want to be sure the reader correctly attributes them to the source, rather than understanding them as a factual description of what went on. In this case, it is unambiguously appropriate. This PhD does not, after all, have any legitimate place in scientific discourse, because it is not even a scientific PhD - it describes purported conspiracies, the author has no expertise in the underlying science, neither did the supervisor or the reviewers (other than the one who rejected it and was replaced). Guy (Help!) 16:46, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Again, what you are doing is using quotes around a single word because you want to be clear that you disagree with the us of those words - you do not accept that her thesis is part of a scientific debate, so the quote marks are being used to emphasis this. You are saying exactly why, and using the quotes as your own commentary withing the article. We have the full quote so it is a non-issue now. - Bilby (talk) 21:50, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am using quotes in the way I was taught at school. This is absolutely standard usage. It's also used journalistically to remind the user that a claim emanates from the parties being discussed, and is not the settled view of the writer. There's nothing wrong with it Guy (Help!) 22:04, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You have outlined why with your comments - "it describes purported conspiracies, the author has no expertise in the underlying science, neither did the supervisor or the reviewers", "the PhD is not a work of science, and the "suppression" simply amounts to challenging the quality of the work, which is a perfectly legitimate part of academic discourse", "this PhD is not part of scientific debate (it includes no actual science) and criticism is not suppression". It is a non-issue now, so let's drop it, but you have been clear on your reasoning each time. - Bilby (talk) 22:07, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Have you read the article? All this is clear from it and based on the sources we cite. It is not part of scientific discourse, it has no actual science in it. It's a social science document discussing vaccine policy, but includes so many inaccuracies and omissions that it's unlikely to form part of that debate either. Only Wilyman thinks it's science. Guy (Help!) 11:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
{edit - misread what you meant by article} It doesn't really matter, as this issue is moot as we're using a longer quote. It seemed like the best fix. - Bilby (talk) 11:35, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in Education: [September 2016]

[edit]


If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription.

We hope you enjoy the newest issue of the Education Newsletter.-- Sailesh Patnaik using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 06 September 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Paolo Petricelli article

[edit]

I saw your tag and re-read the article and I must say that I see your point. I have re-edited the article and feel that its much better now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paolo_Petrocelli Jbmalone (talk) 16:28, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What's going on?

[edit]

@JzG: An individual contacted Wikimedia to inquire about some material that had been removed. I checked to see that it was removed by Bilby and suggested that they leave the query on their talk page, which was done but you removed it. What's going on?--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:33, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The individual is aksing about deletion of an article. The user who created the article is blocked. The IP that left the comment is clearly the same person, so is evading a block. I guess they forgot to mention they were blocked? Guy (Help!) 21:14, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

27century

[edit]

Hi there! I'm a non-admin SPI clerk, and doing cleanup on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/27century just now I noticed your comment about blocking "other accounts" on their talk page. I assume that you ended up there from COIN, based on your note that you were not going to block 27century, but via SPI they have been blocked (by Vanjagenije) for a week for violations of the sockpuppetry and copyright policies. I'm just leaving a note here to make sure everyone involved is on the same page. Also, can you disclose the other accounts you blocked so that we can add them to the SPI case? Thanks. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:44, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed protection

[edit]

Hello, Bilby. This message is intended to notify administrators of important changes to the protection policy.

Extended confirmed protection (also known as "30/500 protection") is a new level of page protection that only allows edits from accounts at least 30 days old and with 500 edits. The automatically assigned "extended confirmed" user right was created for this purpose. The protection level was created following this community discussion with the primary intention of enforcing various arbitration remedies that prohibited editors under the "30 days/500 edits" threshold to edit certain topic areas.

In July and August 2016, a request for comment established consensus for community use of the new protection level. Administrators are authorized to apply extended confirmed protection to combat any form of disruption (e.g. vandalism, sock puppetry, edit warring, etc.) on any topic, subject to the following conditions:

  • Extended confirmed protection may only be used in cases where semi-protection has proven ineffective. It should not be used as a first resort.
  • A bot will post a notification at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard of each use. MusikBot currently does this by updating a report, which is transcluded onto the noticeboard.

Please review the protection policy carefully before using this new level of protection on pages. Thank you.
This message was sent to the administrators' mass message list. To opt-out of future messages, please remove yourself from the list. 17:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

The Kids Menu

[edit]

Hi Bilby, I noticed that you deleted the article for a documentary film entitled The Kids Menu because it was created by a user who was blocked. I'm interested in recreating the article as it does seem to have quite a few verifiable sources but I wanted to ask whether there were any other issues with the article before I can go ahead and re-draft (and re-publish) it to avoid any conflict later on. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 06:48, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't really look too deeply into the content - my main issue was the problem caused by the article being created by a blocked/banned editor. I presume from this that you have taken the contract? I don't have any specific problem with that, so long as the Terms of Use are met. - Bilby (talk) 12:09, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Right. Cheers for your reply. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 21:44, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 September 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Smith

[edit]

I don't understand the most recent rewording. The NYT source specifically states one reason for his vote was the missionary expansion. Why did you separate the two concepts when the source does not? Please help me understand. Tripleahg (talk) 05:50, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The quote form the leaked video was:
"I know and have been a critic of the Iraq war, but I also admit to you that I voted for it because I felt the Lord’s hand in it. I hope it works out, but I can promise you this: You’ll never send missionaries to the Arab street until the rule of law exists in Arabia, and it has taken root in Iraq. And ultimately, if that succeeds, there will be an opportunity to begin building the church in the Middle East, which is a deeply troubled place."
These are two separate claims - one says that he supported the war because he felt that it was God's will, and another that because of the war in Iraq, opportunities have been created for the church. However, while some have conflated the two claims, that is a matter of interpretation - it is entirely possible that he was explaining a benefit to the church, but that was not his reasoning for supporting the war. This is reflected in sources, where some [4] keep the two claims separate, and others (NYT) have conflated them. Given that there are different ways of handling this, and given that the claim is a very strong and potentially serious one, I'd rather err on the side of caution and present them as two separate claims as per the speech. - Bilby (talk) 06:00, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Two points. First, I sat down to listen to the video and I disagree that's where the relevant quote starts. At around 11:30, he says he will discuss the three things that God cares about in politics: 1) free exercise of conscience, 2) right and control of property, and 3) protection of life. He begins to talk about point 1, explaining this refers to the right of the church to have practicing and proselytizing members in a country. After a bit of discussion on this point, including the phrase "rule of law" to describe a government providing this right to the people, is the above quote you included above. Directly after the quote he gives a long anecdote to illustrate this first point. The anecdote is explicitly about Iraqis being baptized into the LDS faith. Around 16:20 as the anecdote is concluding he repeats the phrase "the Lord's hand," saying he saw it in the events of the above anecdote. He then says he shared the anecdote with the previous (now deceased) president of the LDS faith, Gordon Hinckley, "and he said, 'Senator, our missionaries always follow in the footsteps of american soldiers.' The Lord governs in the affairs of nations even if the nations don't know it. So wars and rumors of wars there will be, but the Lord is in charge, just as he is in Iraq on a macro basis." He then moves to a discussion of point 2 (property rights) at about minute 17.
Second, NYT is the most prestigious source reporting on this topic. Even if you disagree with my above point that the longer quote clearly supports the idea that these are not two separate thoughts from the Senator but rather a single subpoint about his vote in the context of his main point about the free exercise of conscience, I don't think we need to be more conservative than the most prestigious source simply because some less prestigious papers have been more conservative.
I would appreciate your thoughts on each of the above points. I'm copying them to the talk page for a more public discussion.Tripleahg (talk) 06:41, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please review COI and NPOV tags placed on a biography

[edit]

Hello Bilby, I read the biography of Raj Raghunathan and am wondering if the COI and NPOV tags placed by you in May 2016 are still valid. Please review. Thank you. --Roshni Kanchan (talk) 03:42, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Editing News #3—2016

[edit]

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter • Subscribe or unsubscribe on the English Wikipedia

Did you know?

Did you know that you can easily re-arrange columns and rows in the visual editor?

Screenshot showing a dropdown menu with options for editing the table structure

Select a cell in the column or row that you want to move. Click the arrow at the start of that row or column to open the dropdown menu (shown). Choose either "Move before" or "Move after" to move the column, or "Move above" or "Move below" to move the row.

You can read and help translate the user guide, which has more information about how to use the visual editor.

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor Team has mainly worked on a new wikitext editor. They have also released some small features and the new map editing tool. Their workboard is available in Phabricator. You can find links to the list of work finished each week at mw:VisualEditor/Weekly triage meetings. Their current priorities are fixing bugs, releasing the 2017 wikitext editor as a beta feature, and improving language support.

Recent changes

[edit]
  • You can now set text as small or big.[5]
  • Invisible templates have been shown as a puzzle icon. Now, the name of the invisible template is displayed next to the puzzle icon.[6] A similar feature will display the first part of hidden HTML comments.[7]
  • Categories are displayed at the bottom of each page. If you click on the categories, the dialog for editing categories will open.[8]
  • At many wikis, you can now add maps to pages. Go to the Insert menu and choose the "Maps" item. The Discovery department are adding more features to this area, like geoshapes. You can read more on MediaWiki.org.[9]
  • The "Save" button now says "Save page" when you create a page, and "Save changes" when you change an existing page.[10] In the future, the "Save page" button will say "Publish page". This will affect both the visual and wikitext editing systems. More information is available on Meta.
  • Image galleries now use a visual mode for editing. You can see thumbnails of the images, add new files, remove unwanted images, rearrange the images by dragging and dropping, and add captions for each image. Use the "Options" tab to set the gallery's display mode, image sizes, and add a title for the gallery.[11]

Future changes

[edit]

The visual editor will be offered to all editors at the remaining 10 "Phase 6" Wikipedias during the next month. The developers want to know whether typing in your language feels natural in the visual editor. Please post your comments and the language(s) that you tested at the feedback thread on mediawiki.org. This will affect several languages, including Thai, Burmese and Aramaic.

The team is working on a modern wikitext editor. The 2017 wikitext editor will look like the visual editor and be able to use the citoid service and other modern tools. This new editing system may become available as a Beta Feature on desktop devices in October 2016. You can read about this project in a general status update on the Wikimedia mailing list.

Let's work together

[edit]

Do you teach new editors how to use the visual editor? Did you help set up the Citoid automatic reference feature for your wiki? Have you written or imported TemplateData for your most important citation templates? Would you be willing to help new editors and small communities with the visual editor? Please sign up for the new VisualEditor Community Taskforce.

If you aren't reading this in your preferred language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:18, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 October 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:28, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit conflicts

[edit]

Apologies for the edit conflicts. I'd like to read your thoughts, so will keep my hands off to give you a chance to respond. I'm not averse to including something in the article, just concerned to see that it's supported by the sources. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 21:39, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I decided I don't care - this is just what we do. We take findings out of context, drop them into articles, and give a misleading account of what the research found. But as that's how we do things, it seems there is nothing to be done. - Bilby (talk) 01:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Electronic Recycling Association

[edit]

I noticed that you marked my page for speedy deletion. The company was involved in a controversey but it has gone far beyond a single event. ERA has partnered witb companies, law enforcement, community groups to fight fraud. It has multiple secondy soucres that are both reliable and indepedent of the subject. I beleive that it meets the criteria, if not. do you have ideas for improvement

Thatwhoiswise (talk) 18:18, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 November 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:51, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Black Book page reversed edits

[edit]

Hi. You've seemed to have reverted the sources I added to the Black Book (company) page; can you explain why? Tate 2009 (talk) 19:27, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but rather than fuss over this, how about we just send it to AfD and see what happens there? - Bilby (talk) 10:26, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My enquiry was not to "fuss" but to clarify. If you think the article should not be in Wikipedia then take it to AfD, but do not remove its sources because this is not constructive. I fixed the article's sources because this is what it needed; you can now take it to AfD if you still think it does not meet notability requirements.Tate 2009 (talk) 00:32, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

[edit]

Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

[edit]

Hi Bilby.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins).MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

[edit]

Hello, Bilby. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 November 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:05, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Brianna Wu

[edit]

Hi Bilby, Looking into a request and making edits without any other sources than a tweet are two different things. Cheers. --SVTCobra (talk) 22:33, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maestrano

[edit]

Hi, I saw that you deleted the article Maestrano. But I think it is a notable company as you can find lots of news references on the web. Search. Can you help me to make it published again? How can I make it neutral and encyclopedic? Can you guide me? I want to work on the draft and request you to publish it when you think it is okay for Wikipedia. Thanks - ActiveTransport (talk) 17:54, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am not convinced that the subject would be notable. However, it is unfortunate that the well has now been poisoned by a banned editor's work. - Bilby (talk) 09:16, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What else needed to make this company notable? All or most of the sources found in google news search are third party sources (Here). Which are enough to pass Notability criteria of Wikipedia that I have read. I will just work on the draft to make it encyclopedic. I will not publish it myself. You or any other reliable Wikipedian can make it live. I think this will fair to avoid any conflict of interest. - ActiveTransport (talk) 06:29, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to know one thing from you. Did all three deleted articles were created from same account? - ActiveTransport (talk) 06:31, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What three deleted articles? - Bilby (talk) 06:33, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I can see that the article has been deleted three times. Two times by Jimfbleak, once by you. Who created the article three times? Same account? - ActiveTransport (talk) 05:51, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Can you review and accept the article? or refer to someone who can review and accept it? Draft:Maestrano. Thanks. - ActiveTransport (talk) 06:34, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 December 2016

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:03, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Extended confirmed protection policy RfC

[edit]

You are receiving this notification because you participated in a past RfC related to the use of extended confirmed protection levels. There is currently a discussion ongoing about two specific use cases of extended confirmed protection. You are invited to participate. ~ Rob13Talk 15:52, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in Education: December 2016

[edit]

Home • Subscribe • Archives • Newsroom - The newsletter team 18:51, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

[edit]

BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I'm wishing you a Merry Christmas, because that is what I celebrate. If you don't like Christmas or just don't celebrate it in any of its forms, then please accept a generic "Happy Holidays". If you celebrate no holidays at this time of year, then hopefully you will be satisfied with an even more generic "Season's Greetings".  :) BOZ (talk) 01:17, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Possible recurring copyvio in Commercial policy

[edit]

Hi, Bilby. I see that most of the material you trimmed from Commercial policy in 2011 was restored by the same student editor in 2012. Was it determined not to be a copyvio, or does it need to be trimmed again? —Patrug (talk) 04:42, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noticing that! Yes, it was copyvio, so I've had to remove it all - I wish I'd picked it up when it was put in, but from memory that was part of a huge problem stemming from an education program being run. Which reminds me that we probably never finished cleaning that up, so I guess I have a task to do. :) - Bilby (talk) 13:10, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Bilby!

[edit]
Happy New Year!

Bilby,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (talk) 05:35, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

The Signpost: 17 January 2017

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:39, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Wikiproject!

[edit]

Hello, Bilby! I saw you recently edited a page related to the Green party and green politics. There is a new WikiProject that has been formed - WikiProject Green Politics and I thought this might be something you'd be interested in joining! So please head on over to the project page and take a look! Thanks for your time. 

Me-123567-Me (talk) 18:20, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

[edit]

Hi You left a note on my talk page mentioning about possible conflict of interest. I did not understand the reason for your doing so. I have no direct associations with any of the topics I have recently edited. I have gone through many of the policies and guidelines and try to adhere to them. I am still new and learning but I do not think that I have done anything that is against the policies. I have tried to adhere to neutral point of view and have tried to reference what I write. Anasuya.D (talk) 14:54, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Under the Terms of Use, you are required to disclose that you are being paid and your employer when you engage in paid editing of articles. It is clear that you were hired to write about Ameri100. This is not forbidden, even though it is strongly discouraged, but under the rules of teh Wikimedia Foundation disclosure is required. - Bilby (talk) 14:58, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that it seems that I had been paid for the edits but the fact is that a friend who works there had asked me to make a Wikipedia page for the company. I had known the company to be reputable and credible. A brief look up of the sources made it look notable to me and I had been trying to adhere to neutral point of view as well as proper process. Prior to forming the article I had no idea that the company had already formed spammy articles which got deleted. I have left a note at here. Anasuya.D (talk) 17:21, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, I am aware of the situation with the article and your relationship with it, but I'm not going to chase that up. You do need to be aware that every time you edit you agree to the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, and those require you to disclose your affiliations when being paid to edit. You are not banned from engaging in paid edits - you just need to be open about it. But ultimately it is your call on how to handle this, which is why I don't want to make anything of this article. Good luck with your editing, but keep in mind that the Terms of Use are binding. - Bilby (talk) 23:26, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
  • Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
  • The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

Obituaries

  • JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.
Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 February 2017

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:46, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INCUBATOR

[edit]

I invite you to comment on as well as to endorse my idea of article incubator. The idea is not new and details of the previous version can be found at WP:INCUBATOR. I would be glad if you enhance it with your experience. Feel free to improve upon the proposal that I have placed. Anasuya.D (talk) 09:42, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 February 2017

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in Education: [February 2017]

[edit]
This Month in Education

Volume 6 | Issue 1 | February 2017

This monthly newsletter showcases the Wikipedia Education Program. It focuses on sharing: your ideas, stories, success and challenges. Be sure to check out the full version, and past editions. You can also volunteer to help publish the newsletter. Join the team!

In This Issue


[edit]
Featured Topic


Newsletter update

Common Challenges: Time is not an unlimited resource



From the Community

Medical Students' contributions reach 200 articles in innovative elective course at Tel Aviv University

Wikilesa: working with university students on human rights

An auspicious beginning at university in Basque Country

The Wikipedia Education Program kicks off in Finland

The Brief Story of Mrgavan WikiClub

Citizen Science and biodiversity in school projects on Wikispecies, Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons


From the Education Team

WMF Education Program to be featured at the Asian Conference for Technology in the Classroom

Opportunities to grow in Oman

An invitation to participate in the "Hundred Words" campaign!

Education Collab updates membership criteria


In the News

Students Can Learn By Writing For Wikipedia

Online communities are supercharging people's careers

Using open source to empower students in Tanzania

Signpost Special Issue: Wikipedia in Education


We hope you enjoy this issue of the Education Newsletter.-- Sailesh Patnaik using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:54, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fair Use in Australia discussion

[edit]

As an Australian Wikipedian, your opinion is sought on a proposal to advocate for the introduction of Fair Use into Australian copyright law. The discussion is taking place at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board, please read the proposal and comment there. MediaWiki message delivery MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Australian Wikipedians. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery

Fractal Analysis

[edit]

Yesterday, I patrolled a new page Fractal Analytics, the article seemed okay to me and I searched on google news to find out whether it is notable. I found numerous secondary citations for the article. Why did you delete it? After watching the log I am now seeing that it was previously deleted with around 215 revisions. What was the problem with that article? - Mar11 (talk) 06:02, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mar11! I had to delete the article, as the creator was block evading to continue to engage in paid editing. Under CSD:G5 we need to delete material created in violation of blocks and bans in order to enforce the restriction. I'm not opposed to recreation at some point, but it can't be by the blocked editor. - Bilby (talk) 07:00, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I would like to create that page again. Can you move that deleted page to Draft:Fractal Analytics? As it was written by a paid editor, there must be some advertisement, promotion and false information in the article. I will check the references and write it complying with WP:NPOV. Thanks. - Mar11 (talk) 09:29, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I won't be able to move the deleted version. The problem is not that the editor was paid, but that the editor is not permitted to contribute to Wikipedia. I am ok with someone recreating their own version of the article, but the contributions of that editor are not welcome. - Bilby (talk) 10:32, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see. As an Inclusionist, I am creating a clean version of the article myself. Thanks - Mar11 (talk) 14:20, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with that. My problem is only with accepting the work of a block-evading editor. This isn't an inclusionist/deletionist issue, but a concern relating to enforcement of sanctions. - Bilby (talk) 14:40, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nitschke

[edit]

You deleted his claim to be the 1st medico to administer a legal, voluntary, lethal injection. It's in the source, so where is the alternative proof and why not put it in the edit summary, or on the talk page? Ratel (talk) 04:23, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see a source for that claim. However, I thought that he didn't administer the injections, as they were self-administered (through his system). - Bilby (talk) 14:10, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Full story here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFalhSCeh6M I'll restore the text and may enlarge. Ratel (talk) 21:32, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's not a reliable source. Do we have something better? - Bilby (talk) 21:33, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Lots and lots. Ratel (talk) 06:11, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Heat Not Burn

[edit]

Why did you delete the Heat Not Burn section? This is very relevant to current developments in tobacco industry, in terms of public health related issues, technology and commercial sales. For example, see: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-03-08/big-tobacco-has-caught-startup-fever — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3760:26E0:B170:E323:CB3F:858A (talk) 08:50, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After an investigation, it was found that the person who created the article had done so using a new account to evade a block. Under policy, if people are found to be adding material in violation of sanctions, we are required to delete the contributions. - Bilby (talk) 08:33, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help me understand what I'm doing wrong

[edit]
Hello, Bilby. 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.

Truth Prevails 22:36, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the help. After 2 of my articles getting deleted on wiki, I had lost the confidence to create or edit new ones. I will now try again.Truth Prevails 21:23, 28 March 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulshahx99 (talk • contribs)

11 years of editing, today.

[edit]
Hey, Bilby. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 22:36, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulshahx99 (talk • contribs) 22:49, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AVN

[edit]

AVN has been found by multiple courts to be deceitful. We absolutely should not use its propaganda as a source even for its own beliefs and claims. When an organisation launches a bogus lawsuit with absolutely no chance of success, and the complaint is packed with falsehoods, to cite that organisation's own rpess release as a source - as the sole source, in virtually every case - for the existence of te bogus lawsuit, is a serious failure of NPOV.

And this comes on top of your long-term advocacy for anti-vaccinationist Judith Wilyman. I think this is looking very bad. Guy (Help!) 23:40, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to fix another problem you made. You clearly do not seem to understand WP:PRIMARY. The AVN is a perfectly reliably source for statements about their own beliefs - indeed, it is the best source for statements about what they believe. I have carefully checked each source independently, confirmed which ones were needed and whether or not they said what we claimed, and added only those sources back. What you are doing is making the article contain unsourced claims about the organisation, and this is a significant mistake. This should not come down to whether or not we agree with the organisation, or whether or not we believe that they are reliable for factual statements about anything other than their own beliefs. - Bilby (talk) 23:43, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
AVN is an anti-vaccine propaganda group. You have restored - twice, now - a blow-by-blow history of their vexatious lawsuits and bogus claims, sourced, in each case, solely to their own press releases. In the case of a reputable individual we can accept some self-sourcing, but where the subject is controversial - for example a group that has been found by courts to be deceptive, as the AVN has - we require reliable, independent sources to establish the significance and the context of what they say.
This is not remotely controversial. The default is reliable independent sources, and self-published primary sources are acceptable only when they are uncontroversial. These are highly controversial. Every single word that AVN utters is suspect. Can you think of any other group that has been ordered by courts to carry a disclaimer on their website stating that they are not a neutral source of information?
Bear in mind that the law was actually changed in response to the claims AVN were making, and the ability of the HCCC to prosecute them before someone was actually harmed.
So, I fully understand WP:PRIMARY, and the issue appears to be that you do not understand how WP:PRIMARY, WP:SPS and WP:FRINGE combine in this case to require the use of reliable independent sources. Guy (Help!) 23:56, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Let's see how the fringe noticeboard discussion goes, although I'm surprised you did not notify me of that. I have explained the situation there. - Bilby (talk) 00:00, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in Education: [March 2017]

[edit]
This Month in Education

Volume 6 | Issue 2 |March 2017

This monthly newsletter showcases the Wikipedia Education Program. It focuses on sharing: your ideas, stories, success and challenges. Be sure to check out the full version, and past editions. You can also volunteer to help publish the newsletter. Join the team!

In This Issue

Featured Topic Newsletter update

Overview on Wikipedia Education Program 2016 in Taiwan

From the Community

High School and Collegiate Students Enhance Waray Wikipedia during Edit-a-thons

Approaching History students as pilot of Education program in Iran

An experience with middle school students in Ankara

Wikishtetl: Commemorating Jewish communities that perished in the Holocaust

From the Education Team

UCSF Students Visit WMF Office as they start their Wikipedia editing journey

Meet the team

In the News

Från dammiga arkiv till artiklar på nätet

If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription.

The new issue of the newsletter is out! Thanks to everyone who submitted stories and helped with the publication. We hope you enjoy this issue of the Education Newsletter.-- Sailesh Patnaik using Saileshpat (talk) 19:07, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting upwork users

[edit]

Have you reported any users to upwork? I'm trying to persuade them to take down some accounts that I know are used by blocked users. I know it's probably a bit futile, but I figure if we can remove users with plenty of jobs it at least disrupts them. Surprisingly it only a little complaining to the CEO of peopleperhour for them to remove all their Wikipedia jobs, so I live in hope!

I just came across MissAdalie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) who you blocked in Feb - do you know if they were CU'd? There are presumably many other articles that they've written. And who's the master in that case? Did you notice that WP:HARASS now permits posting of links to freelancers? I'm still slightly hesitant to do do unless it's really necessary, but I wonder if we could coordinate our efforts better by listing who's who (or perhaps you already have this off-wiki?). Cheers SmartSE (talk) 12:47, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! No, I haven't reported anyone. I don't worry about it - if I do, they'll just come back with a different account, and I won't know who the master is. I do have a plan, which works for some, but unfortunately it depends a bit on how quickly you spot their work after they've done it but before they've been reviewed. I don;t have any problems with other people reporting accounts, it just isn't the path I took. :)
MissAdalie was a sock of User:Khocon, but there wasn't a CU. The job was originally given to Khocon, and then after the article was deleted it was given to User:Mamadoutadioukone. Khocon has done a lot of recent work, so we might pick up a few accounts with a CU - I've got him down for about 10 jobs in March, as he seemed to return to paid editing recently - but I've been hesitant because we traditionally couldn't run a CU based only on off-wiki evidence, so my best bet was to identify two or three accounts and point out the on-wiki similarities to keep within the CU rules. I did see the change to WP:Harass, but because I'm uncomfortable with it I won't be posting jobs. However, it might mean that we can use the job ads to get a CU done, which would change things. I've always been wary of CU because I tend to read the rules rather strictly. - Bilby (talk) 13:09, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
True. I figure that if their job history is lost though, that'll make it harder for them to start again. I'm also unsure whether the sites realise that they are being used in this way and the disruption that it causes. I think we should try to lever WP's image to try and shame them into preventing their users abusing WP.
Hmm that's surprising as I came across another account that had Khocon's articles in their portfolio. If we can conclusively link them to Highstakes then we'd have a better chance of getting accounts removed at upwork. CU-wise, the situation is dissatisfyingly vague and opaque. I've reported some users to CUs who've used throwaways which have been accepted and led to big SPIs but then others which I feel are identical are not checked. My attempt to clarify policy on when CU can and can't be used didn't go anywhere. I will try to get MissAdalie checked though as the off-wiki evidence is so straightforward. SmartSE (talk) 15:41, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm very confident that Khovon and Highstakes are separate users, and have separate accounts on Upwork. Highstakes in particular had a unique editing style that I don't see in the Khovon socks. - Bilby (talk) 01:42, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Linking Upwork jobs to articles

[edit]

Hi Bilby. I don't have much experience in the COI/PAID area of Wikipedia but am interested in following up on the Ravish K Upwork case. To what degree can we link Upwork jobs to Wikipedians and/or Wikipedia articles? I get the impression that if a completed upwork job says "Write an article on X" and there's an article on X created at the same time that it's a pretty open and shut case, but what about if you have to do a little digging to find out who the client is from their other publicly listed jobs? Does that veer into OUTING, too-off-wiki evidence, territory? Thanks, Sam Walton (talk) 08:39, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how much I can help, as the situation is now quite different to how it was a month or so ago. Previously, privacy always trumped COI, so it didn't really matter how we identified that a contractor had written an article, as we couldn't use off-wiki evidence that would out the editor. That meant I was happy to do research to track down what the job was for, but I could only use that as a guide to looking into the article - checking for bias, tagging, and nominating for AFD if warranted. If I did identify a sock, which was frequent, I would only block if there was sufficient on-wiki behavioral evidence to justify the block, such that it could be easily justified without needing any off-wiki proof. Which did tend to hobble what we could do, but was necessary given the community's focus on privacy, and did still allow for some of the worst offenders to be picked up as often we had a good set of behavioral evidence to go by.
Now that we can link directly to the job I don't see why we can't say that, based on the client's previously advertised jobs, this is for article X. Just linking to the job will out the editor, but we can do that now and it is incidental to what the job was in regard to. So I don't see any problem with researching what the job was for. Maybe others will disagree, though - it seems that by loosening the outing policy, we've created a difficult grey area to navigate.
That said, I voted against directly linking to jobs, and I would feel like a hypocrite if I was opposed but did it anyway, so I won't be linking to jobs on-wiki. But that does seem to free up others. - Bilby (talk) 03:43, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
Thanks as always for defending Wikipedia. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:06, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copenhagen Ultracontemporary Biennale

[edit]

You deleted Copenhagen Ultracontemporary Biennale under WP:CSD#G5 (blocked user). Can you say which blocked user you believe is responsible? I ask because a new article has been created at Copenhagen ultracontemporary biennale by the same user, who does not appear to have been blocked for sock puppetry. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:42, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. The user responsible for the prior article was a sockpuppet of User:Jkmarold55, a paid editor recently blocked for sockpuppetry. In this case, I suspect the account recreating it is the original client, not a new sock. - Bilby (talk) 00:45, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This Month in Education: [April 2017]

[edit]
This Month in Education

Volume 6 | Issue 3 | April 2017

This monthly newsletter showcases the Wikipedia Education Program. It focuses on sharing: your ideas, stories, success and challenges. Be sure to check out the full version, and past editions. You can also volunteer to help publish the newsletter. Join the team!

In This Issue

Featured Topic

How responsible should teachers be for student contributions?

From the Community

Cairo and Al-Azhar Universities students wrap up their ninth term and start their tenth term on WEP

Glimpse of small language Wikipedia incubation partnership in Taiwan

Key to recruiting seniors as Wikipedians is long-term work

Education at WMCON17

OER17

Western Armenian WikiCamper promotes Wikiprojects in his school

Building a global network for Education

From the Education Team Mobile Learning Week 2017
If this message is not on your home wiki's talk page, update your subscription.

The new issue of the newsletter is out! Thanks to everyone who submitted stories and helped with the publication. We hope you enjoy this issue of the Education Newsletter.-- Sailesh Patnaik using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:18, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Copenhagen Ultracontemporary Biennale, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page House & Garden. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:45, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Editing News #1—2017

[edit]

Read this in another language • Subscription list for this multilingual newsletter

VisualEditor
Did you know?

Did you know that you can review your changes visually?

Screenshot showing some changes to an article. Most changes are highlighted with text formatting.
When you are finished editing the page, type your edit summary and then choose "Review your changes".

In visual mode, you will see additions, removals, new links, and formatting highlighted. Other changes, such as changing the size of an image, are described in notes on the side.

Toggle button showing visual and wikitext options; visual option is selected.

Click the toggle button to switch between visual and wikitext diffs.

Screenshot showing the same changes, in the two-column wikitext diff display.

The wikitext diff is the same diff tool that is used in the wikitext editors and in the page history.

You can read and help translate the user guide, which has more information about how to use the visual editor.

Since the last newsletter, the VisualEditor Team has spent most of their time supporting the 2017 wikitext editor mode which is available inside the visual editor as a Beta Feature, and adding the new visual diff tool. Their workboard is available in Phabricator. You can find links to the work finished each week at mw:VisualEditor/Weekly triage meetings. Their current priorities are fixing bugs, supporting the 2017 wikitext editor as a beta feature, and improving the visual diff tool.

Recent changes

[edit]

A new wikitext editing mode is available as a Beta Feature on desktop devices. The 2017 wikitext editor has the same toolbar as the visual editor and can use the citoid service and other modern tools. Go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures to enable the ⧼Visualeditor-preference-newwikitexteditor-label⧽.

A new visual diff tool is available in VisualEditor's visual mode. You can toggle between wikitext and visual diffs. More features will be added to this later. In the future, this tool may be integrated into other MediaWiki components. [12]

The team have added multi-column support for lists of footnotes. The <references /> block can automatically display long lists of references in columns on wide screens. This makes footnotes easier to read. You can request multi-column support for your wiki. [13]

Other changes:

  • You can now use your web browser's function to switch typing direction in the new wikitext mode. This is particularly helpful for RTL language users like Urdu or Hebrew who have to write JavaScript or CSS. You can use Command+Shift+X or Control+Shift+X to trigger this. [14]
  • The way to switch between the visual editing mode and the wikitext editing mode is now consistent. There is a drop-down menu that shows the two options. This is now the same in desktop and mobile web editing, and inside things that embed editing, such as Flow. [15]
  • The Categories item has been moved to the top of the Page options menu (from clicking on the "hamburger" icon) for quicker access. [16] There is also now a "Templates used on this page" feature there. [17]
  • You can now create <chem> tags (sometimes used as <ce>) for chemical formulas inside the visual editor. [18]
  • Tables can be set as collapsed or un-collapsed. [19]
  • The Special character menu now includes characters for Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics and angle quotation marks (‹› and ⟨⟩) . The team thanks the volunteer developer, Tpt. [20]
  • A bug caused some section edit conflicts to blank the rest of the page. This has been fixed. The team are sorry for the disruption. [21]
  • There is a new keyboard shortcut for citations: Control+Shift+K on a PC, or Command+Shift+K on a Mac. It is based on the keyboard shortcut for making links, which is Control+K on a PC or Command+K on a Mac. [22]

Future changes

[edit]
  • The VisualEditor team is working with the Community Tech team on a syntax highlighting tool. It will highlight matching pairs of <ref> tags and other types of wikitext syntax. You will be able to turn it on and off. It will first become available in VisualEditor's built-in wikitext mode, maybe late in 2017. [23]
  • The kind of button used to Show preview, Show changes, and finish an edit will change in all WMF-supported wikitext editors. The new buttons will use OOjs UI. The buttons will be larger, brighter, and easier to read. The labels will remain the same. You can test the new button by editing a page and adding &ooui=1 to the end of the URL, like this: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Sandbox?action=edit&ooui=1 The old appearance will no longer be possible, even with local CSS changes. [24]
  • The outdated 2006 wikitext editor will be removed later this year. It is used by approximately 0.03% of active editors. See a list of editing tools on mediawiki.org if you are uncertain which one you use. [25]

If you aren't reading this in your preferred language, then please help us with translations! Subscribe to the Translators mailing list or contact us directly, so that we can notify you when the next issue is ready. Thank you! User:Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:18, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bilby/Archive_12&oldid=1066519284"