Jump to content

User talk:Ched/Archive 34

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 30←Archive 32Archive 33Archive 34Archive 35Archive 36→Archive 40

just thinking

I'm gonna ping a few folks here: Casliber, Ritchie333, Floquenbeam, Drmies, Boing! said Zebedee, and I am sure I could add to that list.

  • One thing I kinda wanted folks to know is a feeling that many may not be aware of, and maybe some of you will agree here. Sure, there are plenty of admins who actually get a kick out of clicking on that block button, ... but there are some who don't actually enjoy it.
  • Admins take a vow to do what's best for the project. But there are times that it means blocking a very well intentioned content contributor. I didn't make many such blocks - but every time I did - I felt that a part of my heart and soul died with that block.
The expression "walk a mile in someone's shoes before you judge them" is always good advice. Because when you do judge them, you will be a mile away, and they won't have any shoes. --kelapstick(bainuu) 04:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Yep. Plenty of times I've mused on blocking and found it thought-provoking. Often someone else has come later. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:42, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
kelapstick, have you ever blocked anyone other than a vandal? You are such a quiet, laid-back and mellow person, observing and listening, ... yes, I'm familiar with saying.
Cas ... yes, I've had that happen more times than not. Back when I used to try to help at various boards, by the time I had spent researching the how and why - a "solution" had been installed. — Ched :  ?  04:55, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
The last one I can think of was Unbuttered Parsnip, who has about 16,000 edits since 2007. The block log says vandalism, but it was largely edit warring to the point of vandalism. Later (like within a week or so) turned to socking, and ended up indef blocked. --kelapstick(bainuu) 04:59, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
It's tough to block someone who has contributed - but when they screw it up, it's a bit easier. Perhaps I'm going off on a tangent here - but SilkTork posted recently with something that was so "spot on" that it amazed me. Something to the effect that the best content contributers often had a personality that wasn't conducive to being an "admin". It was all in general ... but it was brilliant. I'll find the diff, because it's something that should be saved. Anyway - back on topic: I once blocked Calton, RO, and a few others. Blocking sucks .. unblocking is fun. meh - you know me, "I yam what I yam". — Ched :  ?  05:23, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Nah, fun is clearing out 1500 entries from Category:Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old. :| --kelapstick(bainuu) 05:28, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
I'll get back here as soon as I can. — Ched :  ?  05:40, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
  • I agree with those opening thoughts exactly, Ched, and the tensions between intellectual content creators and rules enforcers is the root. It often seems that one set wants the best possible content above all else, and the other wants conformity and obedience above all else. But creative people are rarely conformist, while rules enforcers are rarely creative, and creativity does not come from following rules. I don't know what the answer is, and the constant battles were making my time here very unpleasant, and so I retired for a while. My personal answer now is to withdraw from anything controversial, anything to do with Arb cases, and anything related to drama on the drama boards - and to restrict my admin actions to obvious things like blatant vandalism, socking, etc (and helping to get people unblocked). I won't go near the difficult stuff now, because the partisan fighting makes it an unrewarding use of my time. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:55, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Boing, as per usually, makes great points. Ched, I'll send you a message shortly, which should shed some light on my take on civility. For example. --kelapstick(bainuu) 10:48, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Part of my thoughts on civility is that it is very easy to be witheringly passive-aggressive while using only "polite" words, but at the same time it is equally easy to be friendly and collegial while saying "fuck". But we have too many of the rude words police who instinctively want to punish the latter, but who don't have the intellectual ability to even see the former. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:27, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Precisely. Only tangently related is the phrase "tact is being able to shit on someone's head, and have them thank you for the hat". --kelapstick(on the run) 19:43, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
I must remember that one! Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
  • OK - I'm at a motel - and having issues with their network. I'll get back to ya'all as soon as I can. Cheers. (Ched) 206.123.253.82 (talk) 15:51, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Ok - here's the quote (taken from a larger post) I have noticed over the years that, with some very notable exceptions, prolific high quality content producers tend not to be temperamentally suited to being admins. There is a confidence bordering on arrogance and egocentrism that drives some of our best contributors. This certainty means they can move quickly and decisively and with intense focus to build an article to high standards - standards that they drive and maintain. But those same qualities means that they can sometimes act too rashly in admin situations which require the sort of consideration and consensus that can slow down and inhibit the making of featured articles.[1]
It was something that really resonated with me, and it sort of triggered the thought process to get to my original post here about the .. "hurts to block good folks". I've seen some of the folks in my original ping simply walk away - and I understand it. I wonder if others do. (Ched) 206.123.253.82 (talk) 16:03, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)That's food for thought, and goes to one of the fundamental debates in admin land -- that (some) admins are clueless about what content creators go through and they don't understand that content creators are not inherently rash or arrogant or egotistical; we simply are trying to create and defend good content, often in the face of phenomenal opposition from either POV-pushers or trolls. Out in the real world, for example, only lawyers can become judges, and that's for good reason, time in the trenches is absolutely critical for being able to sort out the threads of a dispute. When we promote an underaged kid with a year's experience to admin and yet someone like, oh say Liz doesn't get the mop without a wall of text, massive off-wiki canvassing on both sides and a 'crat chat, something is seriously wrong with the system. Montanabw(talk)|GO THUNDER! 00:49, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

(Since I was pinged), all I'll say is that there are clearly different standards people have about what is required to support an RfA candidate. Sometimes there are major misgivings but often, it seems like it can be one hasty comment at an AfD, posted in a diff, out of thousands and thousands of edits the editor has made, that can cause some editors to judge someone to be "unsuitable".
I used to think that if I had written some good articles, I wouldn't have had to go through the gauntlet but I see candidates who've created content who still find their contributions dug through for evidence of mistakes, episodes of belligerence...it sometimes seems like many participants at RfAs are simply unsure about the candidate and then look for reasons to oppose to support this uneasiness. And when, unlike me, the candidate has been editing here for years and years and years, it's not hard to find evidence of missteps, casually reckless remarks to someone who has opposed them or a thoughtless revert they made when they were in a foul mood. I think we need to expect that all RfA candidates, especially if they have worked in areas of conflict, carry some baggage and cut them some slack. I think there would be more RfA candidates if some editors didn't foresee that everyone they had ever crossed would show up at their RfA to torpedo the nomination. I don't know any solution to this, unfortunately. Liz Read! Talk! 02:19, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

I didn't get the ping, but since I'm here on my talk page stalker rounds, I'll answer now. I came into serious Wikipedia editing around 2011 after receiving numerous complaints about admin abuse from people elsewhere both on the internet and in real life, and wondered if I could do something about it. (Ask my other half about MickMacNee) sometime....) I've kept that raison d'etre lodged in the back of my mind as I've progressed up the ranks to doing appreciable work, then to adminship. I think there's some grain of truth that the "A" grade writers don't necessarily make great admins; there are different skill sets involved and different people will be suited to them. I personally am more of a "B/C" grade writer and a bit of jack-of-all-trades; I do admin stuff when I'm procrastinating on what article to have a look at next. Getting an article passed through FAC takes far more time, effort, diligence and patience than 1,000 admin tasks (particularly if said tasks are working on CSD or RPP, where I tend to hang out), and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

As you all know, I'm not a fan of the block button, and have made my views widely known. I have moderated forums and BBSes on/off for about 20 years, and banning stops being fun quickly as soon as you realise that even if you ban someone from a board, you can't ban them from the entire internet, and no more is that so than Wikipedia, where socks and block evasion are part of a normal day's work round here. When I see a dispute that involves a long-standing editor on one side (such as that stuff with Putin yesterday) I look a few moves ahead, and it's not hard to figure out that blocking an established editor tends to cause more disruption than it solves, as their fan club tends to object pretty quickly. I've only done a handful of "dodgy" blocks (quick wave to Lugnuts) and in all cases I've stressed that I'm not precious about it and any other admin is free to unblock if they want. It's not a big deal. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:04, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

And I'm not a fan of being blocked (no, really!) Saying it's "not a big deal" is probably true (meanwhile, in Syria...), but a bad block is still a block, and I have no doubt it will be used to my detriment at some future point. Yes, I'm no saint on here, and I have my fair share of <redacted> after my blood, so saying an off-the-cuff remark could be used as extra fuel of that dodgy block from x months back. Now where was I? Oh yes, some redlinks to turn blue. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 18:58, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
will try to reply here later — Ched :  ?  17:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciate the note letting me know what everyone was talking about as far as "outside sites" go. That was an... interesting discussion, but as I eventually found my way to a "strong oppose", based primarily on Hawkeye7's response to the questions at RFA, even knowing it existed before the close of the RFA would've made no difference to my recommendation. Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) (My talkpage) 19:44, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

No problem, I saw your request at the crat-chat talk page. It (WO) can actually be a very educational site if you're looking for perspective. There are some very good people there, many who are also members in good standing here. The site is often labeled with "disgruntled" tags, some of which is justified. One thing to understand is that over the years many people have been hounded off this site, some even outright perma-banned. (and far too often unjustifiably so). Yes, there is often a degree of resentment and loathing dripping from many threads and posts. Some of it justified, some of it simply children and trolls who love the MMPORG game of the Internet. There are many folks here much wiser to the ways of things, and more familiar with history than I - but I'll try to help if I can. (or point you to someone I think is more knowledgeable than I am.) Feel free to visit any time. — Ched :  ?  20:19, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Much appreciated. I'll definitely keep your talkpage on my watchlist for someone to go to when odd things like this get mentioned and I'm like "What the hell is going on?!?" :) Hallward's Ghost (Kevin) (My talkpage) 20:31, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Fine with me. Remember too that I do have my own views, so take my thoughts with a degree of objectivity. :) — Ched :  ?  20:39, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Four years ago ...
kindness and constancy
... you were recipient
no. 25 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

Still valid! Dreadstar was no. 26. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:23, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


Arbitration request

Hi -- the request was to reverse DrMies's action; that's why I worded my comment that way. Looie496 (talk) 20:43, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Canadian Wall

--- sandboxing possible new article ---

Due to the fact that BOTH candidates running for the office of President of the United States during the 2016 campaign may be required to appear in court during the campaign, the country of Canada has been forced to construct a wall to restrict the Illegal immigration of US citizens.

The Clinton email scandal and the Trump University scandal have forced both the Democratic leading candidate and the Republican leading candidate to reduce their campaign schedules in order to confer with legal counsel.

<crystal> Rumor has it that a leading government official from an unnamed country was asked for financial assistance in building the wall; to which he replied: "No F***ing way, cause we don't want 'em either." </WP:CRYSTAL>

refs will go here

LOL, here are some:

Have fun! Montanabw(talk) 07:52, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

LMAO (or cryin my eyes out). TY Montannabw. — Ched :  ?  07:54, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Email info

Sure will, FYI my email was mostly generic, contents below: 

Hello,

A report that you have deceased has been submitted to Wikipedia.  If this is in error, please drop me a note at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Xaosflux.

If this message is being read by a survivor, our condolences on your loss.  I am an administrator at the English Wikipedia where "Lucia Black" provided over 17,000 contributions (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Lucia_Black).  The "user page" has been frozen in place at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lucia_Black.  Other editors may leave messages of remembrance, etc at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lucia_Black.  Should you run in to any issues related to these pages, please feel free to contact me by leaving a message at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Xaosflux.  If I'm not around or you need rapid assistance, you can also leave a message at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard.

Best regards,
Xaosflux
— xaosflux Talk 19:18, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Huh?

Ched how are doing? You posted some link which I do not understand. Anyway I know you are one of the reasonable admins here so I thought I would ask? And Cheers! Probst! {{Beer}} Well it is not the beer picture I wanted but hey its beer. 172.58.137.140 (talk) 16:43, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you - I will store that in a safe place. :-). Actually I've retired from admin. duties, but what link are you in question about? — Ched :  ?  16:50, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Ahhh - gotcha. My bad. OK - hopefully I got it right this time. — Ched :  ?  16:54, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
  • That makes more sense. I wanted to give a beer but I forgot how and was to lazy as I have not been around for awhile. Seems like the good admins retire as they have real life duties that are more important. TParis was also a pretty cool admin who retired. It is my theory that many of the long term admins are on government assistance and/or smoking weed like high in BC. It takes to much time and drains your soul. 172.58.137.140 (talk) 17:08, 3 March 2016 (UTC) If you like Ale try this EPA Summit EPA
Well - I must admit that I've had to limit my alcohol intake; I'd kinda like to get a few more years out of this old body and soul. :-). But thank you. And yes, TParis is indeed a very commendable man. — Ched :  ?  17:35, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
One should not disagree with limiting intake. I am a two or three a couple of times a week guy. I prefer quality over quantity. Just a little R&R now and then. It is less addicting and more rewarding than editing Wikipedia. 172.56.12.251 (talk) 05:33, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood shooting

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Cas, but I didn't really do anything. There are folks far more deserving than I. — Ched :  ?  09:43, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
..."than me "...get the goddamn grammar right ;) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:31, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
So ... "There are folks far more deserving than me am"? Is this a conjunction vs. preposition thing? ... geesh - it's been 50 years since I had English classes; and, I am disadvantaged by being an American. (back at arbcom for less than a month, and already taking the Lord's name in vain) :-P — Ched :  ?  13:53, 23 January 2016 (UTC) .. at least I didn't say then I/me.
  • adjustment for the highborn "There are people far more deserving than <???> [am]." "Folks" is a lowborn phrase that we unwashed tend to use in place of people. — Ched :  ?  14:00, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
"folks" is plenty good enough English for me ;) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:40, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Gamaliel and others arbitration case opened

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others. The scope of this case is Gamaliel's recent actions (both administrative and otherwise), especially related to the Signpost April Fools Joke. The case will also examine the conduct of other editors who are directly involved in disputes with Gamaliel. The case is strictly intended to examine user conduct and alleged policy violations and will not examine broader topic areas. The clerks have been instructed to remove evidence which does not meet these requirements. The drafters will add additional parties as required during the case. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Evidence.

Please add your evidence by May 2, 2016, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. This notification is being sent to those listed on the case notification list. If you do not wish to recieve further notifications, you are welcome to opt-out on that page. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Why would I want to do that? If you want clarification about what I said - just ask it straight out. — Ched :  ?  17:26, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
They have to send these to everyone unless (like me) they've specifically said they don't want it. Otherwise, someone inevitably either complains that they weren't notified and need to be given an extension so they can say their piece, or complains that those on one side of the dispute got notifications and the others didn't and thus the proceedings are unbalanced. I've never agreed with WP:DTTR in any case (surely "the regulars" are precisely those people who are aware that a lot of Wikipedia is automated and thus won't take offense at a block of boilerplate text on their talkpage, while the non-regulars are the ones who would benefit from a personalized explanation rather than a one-size-fits-all cut and paste), but this is a case where templating the regulars is actively desirable, to make sure everyone who's potentially interested in commenting gets the same notification. ‑ Iridescent 17:38, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
I understand (and agree with DTTR). My comment wasn't so much a complaint - as a statement that I really don't have anything to add beyond what I said on the request page. When I did go back and read my own statement on the request page, I did notice however that my sentence structure wasn't very well done in a couple places. So basically - if the Arbs desire any input from me - they are free to ask, and I'll do my best to respond. Hope you and yours are doing well, and best always, — Ched :  ?  18:13, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Editor of the Week : nominations needed!

The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.

The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?

Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!

Sent on behalf of Buster Seven Talk for the Editor of the Week initiative by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


Hey User:Buster7, I really admire that - but I'm not around enough anymore to have a clue on this. It's a great and wonderful concept .. but I recall a conversation I had with User:Risker years ago. Sometimes when you acknowledge one person, another person feels slighted for not being named too. Just a thought. — Ched :  ?  21:28, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Arbcom evidence

--v/r - TP 17:32, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

You have my applause, too! I didn't know Gamaliel until recently, and found him someone who listens and acts upon it, - a rare quality. It's with his changed vote that Andy is free again and we can forget the infoboxes case ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:58, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Comments removed as a clerk action

Hi Ched, at the direction of several non-recused arbitrators, I have removed two comments made by you on arbitration case talk pages. For the sake of formality, this is a clerk action; you are "remind[ed] that clerks are authorised to sanction users per the arbitration policy" and may appeal this action or give any other statement by email to clerks-l@lists.wikimedia.org or arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 21:50, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others closed

An arbitration case regarding Gamaliel and others has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

  1. Gamaliel is admonished for multiple breaches of Wikipedia policies and guidelines including for disrupting Wikipedia to make a point, removing a speedy deletion notice from a page he created, casting aspersions, and perpetuating what other editors believed to be a BLP violation.
  2. DHeyward and Gamaliel are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with or discussing each other anywhere on Wikipedia, subject to the usual exemptions.
  3. DHeyward (talk · contribs) is admonished for engaging in incivility and personal attacks on other editors. He is reminded that all editors are expected to engage respectfully and civilly with each other and to avoid making personal attacks.
  4. For conduct which was below the standard expected of an administrator — namely making an incivil and inflammatory close summary on ANI, in which he perpetuated the perceived BLP violation and failed to adequately summarise the discussion — JzG is admonished.
  5. Arkon is reminded that edit warring, even if exempt, is rarely an alternative to discussing the dispute with involved editors, as suggested at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.
  6. The community is encouraged to hold an RfC to supplement the existing WP:BLPTALK policy by developing further guidance on managing disputes about material involving living persons when that material appears outside of article space and is not directly related to article-content decisions.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:38, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others closed

How're things?

Hi Ched, just dropping by to see how you're doing - hope 2016 is going as well as it can -- samtar talk or stalk 13:08, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm still here ..thanks for dropping by. It means more than you'd think. — Ched :  ?  13:13, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Hey no worries, talk page or my email is always open -- samtar talk or stalk 13:19, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Re: your user page addition
A good antidote for being sick of "this wiki monstrosity" is Special:Random.
For example, this morning it took me to Canton of Saint-Trivier-de-Courtes. Very, very, very far off the beaten path - apparently it doesn't even exist anymore. And yet it's had 31 page views in the last month. 31 people presumably were made slightly happier and/or wiser because someone took the trouble to write it. 31 isn't a small number; it's a pretty big number, when you think about it.
Dr. Floq prescribes 5 Special:Randoms, 3 times a day, until symptoms diminish. And lay off the fatty foods and looking at ArbCom pages. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:54, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
I happened upon Ben Rhodes (White House staffer) ... but hey. All good huh? — Ched :  ?  18:13, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Your signature

Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated <font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors. Your signature is also causing Tidy bug affecting font tags wrapping links.

You are encouraged to change

— <small><span class="nowrap" style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:1px;"><b>[[User:Ched|Ched]]</b> : [[User_talk:Ched|<font style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#0000fa;"> ? </font>]]</span></small> : — Ched :  ? 

to

— <small><span class="nowrap" style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:1px;"><b>[[User:Ched|Ched]]</b> : [[User_talk:Ched|<span style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#0000fa;"> ? </span>]]</span></small> : >— Ched :  ? 

Respectfully, Anomalocaris (talk) 10:15, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Ched. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Computer Security user status

Hello Ched,

I would just like to inquire on your status on WikiProject Computer Security as the list of WikiProject Computer Security/Members is going to be improved to list active and inactive users.

This is update is being done according to a request for comments on the WikiProject Computer Security talk page. Be sure to state your status at the User status section in the WikiProject Computer Security talk page before the end of four weeks as this will state your status as inactive in the project if not done before then.

FockeWulf FW 190 (talk) 19:52, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

You can remove me from any and all lists. I'll fix a typo or error now and again - but don't log in anymore. (Ched) 2601:547:1203:1414:B964:3ECC:EFCD:38A5 (talk) 18:40, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks all around

Just for future reference: I don't mind an IP dropping a note here (so long as it's not outright vandalism). I've even posted a time or two myself as an IP. I'm really not interested in coming back right now - but I REALLY appreciate you folks who keep an eye on my page - Thank you.

  • A special shout out to a few folks, especially those who have been on the opposite side of the isle on occasion. User:Cassianto and User:SchroCat - it impresses me. :-) Thank you!!
  • and of course User:Sitush, Gerda, User:Linguist111, Montanabw, MarkA, User:Bbb23, and so many more. Usually folks are forgotten a week after they're gone - so it's really special to know a few folks remember me. :-)

OK - password is on a thumbdrive - but I likely won't be back any time soon as a registered user. My very best to all, and thank you for so much.

  • Ched

New newsletter for Notifications

Hello

You are subscribing to the Notifications newsletter on English Wikipedia.

That newsletter is now replaced by the monthly and multilingual Collaboration team newsletter, which will include information and updates concerning Notifications but also concerning Flow and Edit Review Improvements.

Please subscribe!

All the best, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 10:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving

Danke
Variedades de calabaza

Miss you, be well, hugs, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:05, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Holiday card

Wishing you a Charlie Russell Christmas,
Ched!
"Here's hoping that the worst end of your trail is behind you
That Dad Time be your friend from here to the end
And sickness nor sorrow don't find you."
—C.M. Russell, Christmas greeting 1926.
Montanabw(talk) 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Editor of the Week seeking nominations (and a new facilitator)

The Editor of the Week initiative has been recognizing editors since 2013 for their hard work and dedication. Editing Wikipedia can be disheartening and tedious at times; the weekly Editor of the Week award lets its recipients know that their positive behaviour and collaborative spirit is appreciated. The response from the honorees has been enthusiastic and thankful.

The list of nominees is running short, and so new nominations are needed for consideration. Have you come across someone in your editing circle who deserves a pat on the back for improving article prose regularly, making it easier to understand? Or perhaps someone has stepped in to mediate a contentious dispute, and did an excellent job. Do you know someone who hasn't received many accolades and is deserving of greater renown? Is there an editor who does lots of little tasks well, such as cleaning up citations?

Please help us thank editors who display sustained patterns of excellence, working tirelessly in the background out of the spotlight, by submitting your nomination for Editor of the Week today!

In addition, the WikiProject is seeking a new facilitator/coordinator to handle the logistics of the award. Please contact L235 if you are interested in helping with the logistics of running the award in any capacity. Remove your name from here to unsubscribe from further EotW-related messages. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:19, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!
Wishing you a happy, healthy, and prosperous 2017. Thanks for your friendship! -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 00:36, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Precious five years!

Precious
Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:09, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks You Endercase (talk) 04:37, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Well, apparently they don't serve bourbon in this joint. Cheers Ched! Drmies (talk) 03:33, 18 April 2017 (UTC)


Hey buddy - how the heck ya doin? Hi and TY WV, Gerda, and Endercase ... appreciate yinz dropping a line. Hope all is well with everyone. (Ched - not logged in) (maybe I can recover my password?) 2601:547:1202:3D70:C104:C964:B802:4439 (talk) 14:39, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

HA - FOUND IT.  :-) — Ched :  ?  14:42, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Hi Ched, just a note wishing you well. I’ve seen that you are not as frequent here as you used to be, which is a shame. I hope, for purely selfish reasons, you return on a more frequent basis in the not too distant future. CassiantoTalk 09:30, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Cass - good to see you still about. I may make an edit here and there. :-) — Ched :  ?  22:45, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Your signature

... Delete ...

I saw your note the first time - now go away and leave me alone. If my sig. is such a problem - then go get an admin. to block this account - because I'm not changing my signature just to satisfy you.

sigh

— Ched :  ? 22:42, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
— Ched :  ? - 22:44, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
— Ched :  ? , - 22:46, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
— Ched :  ? - 22:47, 3 February 2018 (UTC) — Ched :  ? - 22:53, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

So mr. "let's change the code for no good reason at all" ... the new markup screws up spacing I see. Sigh. Change for the sake of change - Kids today, fixing things that aren't broke - and causing more problems than they're solving. Maybe things haven't changed very much around here. Oh well - more of my wishful thinking. — Ched : |  ? | - 22:58, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

How about this: — Ched :  ?  ?? — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:52, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Duh? .. shoulda remembered that - tyvm. — Ched :  ?  — 19:27, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:34, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Great to see you Gerda - and thank you again. :-) — Ched :  ?  — 12:07, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Seven years now, also of the day you gave me that ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:John Logiudice

A tag has been placed on your user page, User talk:John Logiudice, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be advertising which only promotes or publicises someone or something. Promotional editing of any kind is not permitted, whether it be promotion of a person, company, product, group, service, belief, or anything else. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Calton | Talk 04:13, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Ched. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Ched. 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.Bishonen | talk 16:53, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

2019


Die Zeit, die Tag und Jahre macht

Happy 2019 -

begin it with music and memories

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:33, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda ... Hope you have a wonderful 2019 — Ched :  ?  — 02:11, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! Please check out "Happy" once more, for a smile, and sharing (a Nobel Peace Prize), and resolutions. I wanted that for 1 January, but then wasn't sad about having our music pictured instead. Not too late for resolutions, New Year or not. DYK that he probably kept me on Wikipedia, back in 2012? By the line (which brought him to my attention, and earned the first precious in br'erly style) that I added to my editnotice, in fond memory? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:20, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
February
The Hidden Valley, Negev
... with thanks from QAI

Thank you for improvements in February! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:16, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

An notice

Please see [[2]]

I don't get involved in that kind of thing anymore, but thanks for letting me know HiaB. (note: you forgot to sign your post) — Ched :  ?  — 19:43, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't blame you, I don't want to be there either. Thanks and cheers. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:44, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Well good luck - hope you get what you're looking for. (or rather what you want removed) — Ched :  ?  — 19:53, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Nice to see you again, Ched. I hope all is well with you. Have a great 2019! Liz Read! Talk! 21:39, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Sandboxing

#SANFRAMBAN, #WikiIsBurning
— Ched :  ?  — 11:31, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

welcome back

Nice to see you back Ched! :)
But I am a little mad at you. It has been more than an year, yet Floquenbeam or you haven't told me anything. —usernamekiran(talk) 10:35, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh my, I do have to apologize. I smiled back then thinking it was humor, but I failed to look to see who you were or where you were from. "You and yours" is a common American term which basically refers to a person and their friends and family. I imagine it's used simply because it's much easier than saying "you and your wife, your son, your mom, etc." Now if you're familiar with the term .. :-) ... if not then I hope you'll accept my apology. We Americans have a bad habit of thinking we are the center of the universe. — Ched :  ?  — 10:48, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
By the way - I don't know Floq personally, so I don't know of any family (or if I did then the ravages have time have stolen those memories). In the back of my mind (in a very hazy, dark corner) I'm thinking I read somewhere that there was a Mrs. Floq - but I could be mistaken on that. If nothing else, I'm sure he has a friend or two, perhaps even a pet. :-) — Ched :  ?  — 10:51, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
yes, it was part humour. I didnt know the term back then, but i thought it meant life in general - including family. And no need to apologise mate :D
Nice to see you back again —usernamekiran(talk) 14:18, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
Happy to see you're requesting your mop back. Over the past week or so I think that maybe, one day, in the future, I might consider giving an RFA a go one day, but honestly...that place scares me heh. Hope you're gonna stick around this time! Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 15:08, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
Thank you Steve. Actually I was around a bit more than some would think - just very low profile. Not sure that will change a WHOLE lot, but we shall see. If you do decide to RfA, let me know and I'd be happy to nom ya unless there's something really nasty I don't know about .. lol. Cheers buddy. — Ched :  ?  — 03:28, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
I mean there's nothing new but you never know, 11 years on some might still oppose for...you know... Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 04:38, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello from the past

Hey Ched, noticed you're still lurking around here now and the so thought I'd pop in and say hello. Hope you are well! Steven Crossin 00:55, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-32

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 6 August. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 7 August. It will be on all wikis from 8 August (calendar).

Problems

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 7 August at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • Today everyone can see IP addresses if someone edits without an account. In the future this could be more hidden. This is to protect unregistered editors so fewer can see their IP address. This would only happen after we make sure the tools for vandal fighting can still be effective. You can read more and comment.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

13:24, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Tech News: 2019-33

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools. Feedback on the discussion page is appreciated. [5]
  • Due to the absence of volunteer maintenance of Cologne Blue skin, the link to activate it will be hidden. The skin will still work, but editors using it are encouraged to switch to another skin. [6]

Changes later this week

  • Due to Wikimania, there is no deployment this week. [7]

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 13 August at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • The "Wikidata item" link will be moved from "Tools" to "In other projects" section on all Wikimedia projects, starting on August 21. Full announcement, Phabricator task.

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Q14

Your question is a duplicate of Q12. Just FYI (also mis-numbered). Primefac (talk) 18:59, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Primefac .. thank you - struck. I actually read through that section twice and still missed it. Sorry. — Ched :  ?  — 19:30, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


Tech News: 2019-34

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Tech News

  • There will be no Tech News issue next week. The next issue of Tech News will be sent out on 2 September 2019.

Problems

  • Advanced item Some abuse filters stopped working because of a code change. Only variables for the current action will work. Variables defined inside a branch may not work outside of that branch. You can read more to see how to fix the filters.
  • Only six accounts can be created from one IP address per day. Between 12 August and August 15 this was two accounts per day. This was because of a security issue. It is now six accounts per day again. [8]

Changes later this week

  • Only a limited number of accounts can be created from one IP address. An IP address can be whitelisted so that it can create as many accounts as needed. This is useful at events where many new persons learn to edit. IP addresses that are whitelisted for this reason will also not show CAPTCHAs when you create accounts. This will happen on Wednesday. [9]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 20 August. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 21 August. It will be on all wikis from 22 August (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 21 August at 15:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

  • There is an RFC about creating a new global user group with the right to edit abuse filters. This will be used to fix broken filters and make sure all filters will still work when software changes happen. You can read more and comment.
  • Special:Contributions/newbies will no longer be working. This is because of performance reasons. It showed edits by new accounts. You can see this in the recent changes feed instead. [10]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

15:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you

For this. Was clogging up my noticeboard! Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 23:09, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Worth a shot, hope it helps :) And good luck with Darkfrog. — Ched :  ?  — 23:15, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Depends on what the community says. Might turn the whole thing down, it's really not up to me at this stage. Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 01:34, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
You are weird, just sayin'. Steven Crossin Help resolve disputes! 09:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
That's the rumor. :-) — Ched :  ?  — 10:22, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Short descriptions

Hi Ched. I've noticed that you've been adding a short description tag to articles to import the wikidata short description. That's a good idea. A simpler way of doing it is just to type in {{short description|wikidata}} and that will automatically import the wikidata short description straight from wikidata, saving editors (including yourself) the need to type the short description into wikipedia and update it every time the wikidata short descripton is updated. Bahnfrend (talk) 09:44, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Bahnfrend, I'll take a look at that. I have been using the Shortdesc helper (the gadget version). — Ched :  ?  — 10:08, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ched/Archive_34&oldid=1089760099"