Jump to content

User talk:I JethroBT/Archive 16

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18→Archive 20

The Signpost: 09 March 2016

Wrong Decision on Sanders

Your decision on Sanders' religion is simply wrong, and you've overridden the majority user view in the RfC. This isn't really very complicated: Sanders is Jewish, but he's never expressed any belief in the Jewish religion. There are many people who are culturally Jewish who would be offended if they were labeled Religion=Jewish. In this case, you're labeling someone who is likely agnostic or atheist as a religious person. This is an issue of BLP and an issue of editing consensus. You should retract your decision and allow the majority editor opinion to stand. -Thucydides411 (talk) 23:01, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

@Thucydides411: You're right, it's not complicated: Consensus and the majority user view are not the same thing. Also, the assertions you've presented were already forwarded in the RfC and on my talk page here, and I've addressed them, so I won't be retracting my decision on that basis. I, JethroBT drop me a line 00:13, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
This is a factual issue, and it's clear you're wrong on it. And it's also an issue of your interaction with the editor base, and you're clearly setting yourself above them too. You're factually wrong, and acting in a manner which damages the community. -Thucydides411 (talk) 01:12, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
And just to add to this, you didn't adequately address the issue above. As you yourself wrote above, the source material for claiming Religion=Jewish is threadbare, and the issue is murky. I'd add that from Sanders' various interviews on the subject, and from being familiar with his general background, there's a strong chance that he's agnostic or atheist. Given this situation, I can't see how you justify your decision to overrule the majority editor opinion. -Thucydides411 (talk) 01:16, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Look, I don't know where you're getting that I'm "clearly above everyone else." I'm not. I make mistakes just like everyone else around here. At the same time, I'm not going to change my mind on the basis of probabilistic arguments, and I never said the evidence was threadbare, only that Sanders' public speech has frequently (but not always) been unclear. I'm not going to continue debating those specific matters with you. If you're aware of new information that I either missed or was not available during the discussion, I'm open to reviewing that. You also have the option to open a review over at WP:AN. I, JethroBT drop me a line 02:36, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
It's disturbing that you say that you won't work on probabilistic arguments. If there is a strong or even moderate probability that Sanders is not religious, then the article cannot claim that he is religious. Sanders' public statements have indeed been unclear, and led many (as cited by others above) to conclude that he's tip-toeing a fine line where he can both avoid lying and avoid saying he's completely irreligious. I think the burden is on you to produce new information, because you haven't cited source material that would justify the Religion=Jewish Infobox parameter. This is a very murky case, in which the most likely answer is that Sanders is agnostic or atheist. Why go out on a limb and write something that we not only don't know to be true, but that we have strong reasons to suspect is outright false? -Thucydides411 (talk) 03:07, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Thucydides411, I understand your frustration and I also disagree with the close decision, but I think your anger at Jethro is misplaced. He deserves appreciation for tackling that RfC to begin with, likely knowing at the outset that he would have to contend with upset editors regardless of how he closed it. Let's stick with arguments based on reliable sources and Wikipedia guidelines, and see if he can be convinced to reconsider his position. He's willing to engage in discussion now, but that willingness will evaporate quickly if we start casting aspersions or accusations of bad faith.

Jethro, a question for you: since we lack a clear self-identification by Sanders in direct speech where he says he is religiously Jewish or that his faith is Judaism, if we can find a debate clip wherein a questioner mentions the word 'Jewish' somewhere in the preamble, and Sanders mentions that faith is "a guiding principle in my life" in his lengthy response, can we synthesize that into a conclusion that Sanders practices Judaism (or that his Religion = Jewish [sic])? And if so, would there be a conflict with adding to the article, as an assertion of fact in Wikipedia's voice, something close to (suitably paraphrased to avoid copyvio):

Yes/No to the synthesis, and Yes/No to the contradictory content, and why do you feel that way? Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 01:53, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

For the record Although I disagree with I JethroBT's decision, it was clearly made in good faith and with a lot of thought behind it. I cringed when i read the words "you're clearly setting yourself above them too" and "You're acting in a manner which damages the community". I strongly dispute those claims, and I would ask for more civility and no further personal attacks. Please stick to discussing what is in the sources and what the policies require. In other words, more light and less heat, please. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:40, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Re: User:Thucydides411's claim that "Your decision on Sanders' religion is simply wrong, and you've overridden the majority user view in the RfC.": I'm not going address the first part of that statement, which is what the whole dispute has been about and about which plenty has been written, but the second part of that statement is simply empirically false. The RfC survey had 29 support votes and 27 oppose votes, so the majority user view in the RfC was for inclusion, and so User:I JethroBT agreed with and did not override the majority view in the RfC. —Lowellian (reply) 09:56, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

  • Note: Incorrect - Support votes certainly did not outnumber Oppose votes, after duplicate Supports were removed (see for example, SPACKlick) and after Supports for non-options were removed (such as 'Judaism', see for example Aquillion). But this is a moot argument from the very start, as Jethro mentioned above, and Guy mentioned below, consensus is not determined by counting !votes. I'm fairly certain (at least I hope) Jethro neither agreed with nor disagreed with a perceived "majority view". Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 22:09, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
If the close was a straight count of !votes (which is almost always the wrong way to close an RfC), 29 to 27 would be considered "no consensus".
A key information page on this is Wikipedia:Closing discussions#How to determine the outcome:
"Consensus is not determined by counting heads, but neither is it determined by the closer's own views about what is the most appropriate policy. The closer is there to judge the consensus of the community, after discarding irrelevant arguments: those that flatly contradict established policy, those based on personal opinion only, those that are logically fallacious, those that show no understanding of the matter of issue. If the discussion shows that some people think one policy is controlling, and some another, the closer is expected to close by judging which view has the predominant number of responsible Wikipedians supporting it, not personally select which is the better policy. He or she is not expected to decide the issue, just to judge the result of the debate, and is expected to know policy sufficiently to know what arguments are to be excluded as irrelevant. If the consensus of reasonable arguments is opposite to the closer's view, he or she is expected to decide according to the consensus. The closer is not to be a judge of the issue, but rather of the argument. ... Wikipedia policy... cannot be superseded by any other guidelines or by editors' consensus."
(I highly recommend reading that entire information page and closely reading all of the policies and guidelines it links to).
The key here is the "after discarding irrelevant arguments: those that flatly contradict established policy, those based on personal opinion only, those that are logically fallacious, those that show no understanding of the matter of issue" bit. A !vote that only references a PDF press handout of uncertain authorship should be discarded as violating our policy requiring self-identification through direct speech. That PDF certainly should not be cited by the closing admin! A !vote from an editor who thinks a "I am proud to be Jewish" supports a claim of "Religion: Jewish" should be discarded as being logically fallacious and showing no understanding of the matter of issue. (A Google search on "Who is a Jew?" will turn up dozens of high-quality sources as well as our own Who is a Jew? article, all supporting the fact that "Jewish" has multiple meanings, many of them nonreligious). The closing admin certainly should not accept such a clear strawman argument as fact and imply -- contrary to fact -- that anyone actually argued that Sanders is not Jewish!
In my opinion this discussion is unlikely to result in a voluntary overturn, and thus we should either file an appeal or drop the subject. I personally will not file an appeal because, frankly, I have been intimidated by what I consider multiple credible threats to drag my name through the mud, accusing me of being antisemitic on blogs and in the press, and even a threat to sue me for defamation. I will be glad to comment if someone else files such an appeal. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:16, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 March 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:12, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 March 2016

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

logo question

Hi, Jethro - did the File:WikiProject_Accuracy_logo.png pass the acid test? After a month of no activity, there is suddenly a great deal of activity at the project page and I'm just trying to cover all the bases. Thank you in advance. Atsme📞📧 15:40, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

(replying with staff account) Hey Atsme. I suspect the recent activity stems from this discussion on wikimedia-l. Can you clarify what you mean by acid test? I'm not actually in a position to officially approve the contents of proposals (though I can help folks develop them-- let me know if you want to chat!). With regard to the image, I uploaded it only because I saw you wanted to incorporate it into the Project Accuracy proposal, and it wasn't appearing because it was only uploaded locally to en.wikipedia.The trademark policy states that you can remix and use the logo without permission for use on Wikimedia sites, with the stipulation that its usage shouldn't suggest endorsement from or affiliation with the Wikimedia Foundation. I'd suggest sending an e-mail over to trademarks@wikimedia.org to to make sure you're in good shape. I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 05:43, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
I definitely would like to chat. Is it something we can do via Skype or must it be text/email? Tomorrow?? Atsme📞📧 06:17, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
@Atsme: Skype would be great. I have some availability tomorrow and much more on Wednesday. Why don't you e-mail me at cschilling@wikimedia.org and we can get something set up? I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 16:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

For your attention

Ugh. Just FYI. Safehaven86 (talk) 22:56, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

@Safehaven86: Ugh indeed, but it looks like the behavior has stopped. Thanks for addressing it. I, JethroBT drop me a line 20:04, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
For closing an RFC that would result in people complaining no matter how you close it, I award you the You can't please everyone barnstar. Your work in difficult areas is appreciated. HighInBC 16:25, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Hey thanks, HighInBC! In the end, I reconsidered my close because folks had some good points to the contrary. You might be surprised, but with the RfCs I've closed, I've received a great deal more appreciation than complaints. I'm very thankful for it. I, JethroBT drop me a line 08:09, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
A difficult case. HighInBC 15:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
I would like to add that I in particular appreciate your close, and would have appreciated it whether I agreed with it or not. I cannot reasonably expect a closer to agree with me, but I do expect a thoughtful close, and it was clear from the start that this is what we got in this case. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:54, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
I, too, would like to belatedly add my expression of appreciation for your efforts in this matter. Volunteering to wade into such a complicated issue, where good points (and passionate involvement) are to be found on all sides, takes a particular rare quality of dedication to the Wikipedia project. The fact that you found arguments compelling enough at separate points during your review to render closing arguments for competing sides of the issue attests not only to the complexity of the issue, but also to your thoroughness in pursuing the best final resolution. I hope you'll find it reassuring that your eventual final decision that "consensus was to exclude the religion parameter from the biography infobox", has been echoed by the Wikipedia community at the Village Pump in a subsequent related RfC, which determined there was "Overwhelmingly clear consensus to remove the parameter from the infoboxes." Thanks for leading, and the above Barnstar is well deserved. Regards, Xenophrenic (talk) 21:42, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Closure request

I JethroBT, when it comes time for this RfC regarding WP:Spoiler to close, will you close it? It's a complicated discussion, and this is a case where I'd be more comfortable with a very good closer such as yourself handling it. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

@Flyer22 Reborn: I'd be happy to; the discussion is just over a week old and still active, though. Would you mind if I waited until activity slowed down there? I, JethroBT drop me a line 05:54, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. And, yes, I expected a waiting period. This is why I stated "when it comes time for." Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:28, 18 March 2016 (UTC)
@Flyer22 Reborn: Ah sorry, missed that one. :P I, JethroBT drop me a line 01:02, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Update: The RfC tag recently expired. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:13, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

@Flyer22 Reborn: I did catch your message, sorry I didn't reply earlier! I haven't had a lot of time to set aside to doing the review based on the depth of the discussion. I normally try to do these in one sitting, but with my current WMF work and off-wiki circumstances, I need to read and take notes over a few days before I'm ready to close the discussion. I am still planning on doing the close, but I'll probably need until the weekend. Is that OK? I, JethroBT drop me a line 23:23, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining. And, yes, that's okay.
On a side note: Since I watch your talk page, there is usually no need to ping me here to it. The pinging is not a problem for me, though. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:26, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Flyer, I'm sorry to step back like this, but I really don't have time to close this one right now. I'm going to be away on vacation soon and I have too much stuff to do off-wiki before I leave. I tried to sit down to check it out again last night, and I couldn't focus because I've been so exhausted. I know ANRFC takes forever, but please post the request there if you'd like it closed by an uninvolved admin. My apologies, I, JethroBT drop me a line 13:06, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
I just saw that it's listed there, and I was going to note there that you plan to close this one, but then I saw your latest comment here. While I would have preferred you close this, since I don't think it's going to get the close it deserves otherwise, I appreciate you considering the matter. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:27, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

April Fools? Nope! Welcome to the Women Scientists worldwide online edit-a-thon during Year of Science

Join us!

Women Scientists - worldwide online edit-a-thon -
a Year of Science initiative

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 01:59, 1 April 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage

The Signpost: 1 April 2016

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

You've got mail!

good morning! I just sent you an email if you could please check it. Ftripodi (talk) 15:00, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 April 2016

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

Precious anniversary

A year ago ...
imagine others complexly
... you were recipient
no. 1182 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:32, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: It's been a good year for me, Gerda. I remember last April, I was in a rough patch, and receiving this recognition from you was very kind and lifted my spirits. I hope this past year has been kind to you as well. :) I, JethroBT drop me a line 09:09, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. This past year had very high and very low points. A friend died, another returned after vanishing. I archived "pride and prejudice 2" end of 2015, which is good ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:49, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 16

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 16, February-March 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs)

  • New donations - science, humanities, and video resources
  • Using hashtags in edit summaries - a great way to track a project
  • A new cite archive template, a new coordinator, plus conference and Visiting Scholar updates
  • Metrics for the Wikipedia Library's last three months

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:17, 14 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)

The Signpost: 24 April 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:41, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 2 May 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:09, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

GLAM Boot Camp announced (June 14-16 in DC)

You have expressed interest in the GLAM-Wiki US Consortium, so you may be interested in attending the GLAM Boot Camp next month in Washington, DC. This is a training designed to help Wikipedians interested in guiding museums, libraries, and other cultural institutions in wiki engagement. Travel funding available for those in North America. Since the event is coming up soon, please be sure to add your name to the page if you are interested -- and please pass this announcement along. (You may want to share on Facebook or on Twitter.) Thanks for your interest! -MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:24, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

My apologies - here is the link for the GLAM Boot Camp mentioned above: Wikipedia:GLAM/Boot Camp. -Pete (talk) 04:30, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello

I JethroBT how are you? I heard that you are host in teahouse and you adopt a user. Can you adopt me? I am new on this wiki promise to make wikipedia better. For that i need to study what is vandualism and how to revert them? .I want you to be my teacher on this site.Please can you do for me?I promise you that i will do whatever want me to do._Bivek bhattarai (talk) 14:02, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

@Bivek bhattarai: Hi Bivek. I'm sorry, but I don't have a lot of time to devote to teaching editors in-depth these days. But thanks for asking. If you have a question about a particular article, I can give you a hand though, so feel free to let me know if something like that comes up. Thanks, I JethroBT drop me a line 09:52, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 May 2016

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

Wiknic 2016

Do you have any thoughts of a location for a WP:WIKNIC this year?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:02, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

@TonyTheTiger: I haven't-- been pretty busy on the work side of things lately and getting ready for Wikimania. Maybe we could try Montrose Beach? I JethroBT drop me a line 09:54, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

CurtisNaito and TH1980

I hope you're watching this. The two have suddenly started editing Korean influence on Japanese culture again the same day, including adding something that was hotly disputed on the talk page. Then immediately following the comment you made on TH1980's talk page—"topics dealing with influences between countries are complex because sources claims sometimes conflict. In these cases, due weight is important to think about"—CurtisNaito has responded saying that the article "could be nominated for good article status" "just by adding in all the citations"—meaning the disputed citations "which were already part of previous versions of the article". Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:58, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

@Curly Turkey: I'm aware of it, and it seems like we've been here before. I'll need some time to review and decide what to do this weekend. I JethroBT drop me a line 10:18, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2016

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

The Signpost: 05 June 2016

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

The Signpost: 15 June 2016

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

Books & Bytes - Issue 17

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 17, April-May 2016
by The Interior, Ocaasi, UY Scuti, Sadads, and Nikkimaria

  • New donations this month - a German-language legal resource
  • Wikipedia referals to academic citations - news from CrossRef and WikiCite2016
  • New library stats, WikiCon news, a bot to reveal Open Access versions of citations, and more!

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Fringe Theories Noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello, I JethroBT. This message is being sent to inform you that a discussion is taking place at Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Grin's Report. Thank you. Cnilep (talk) 01:36, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Hello

How was Wikimania? Have you heard about NYC's Afro-Latino engagement? Can we do something similar?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:51, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

What date do you think we should have for a WP:WIKNIC?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:52, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
I am thinking of July 23 or July 30 from 12-3 unless you will be attending and want to be available until later. I've been to Montrose beach. Do we want to actually meet on the beach, near the beach house/pavilion/station thingy, or nearer to some of the fields?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:17, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
  • I see that you have not edited WP since June 26. I am going to ping you (via email). I am set to plan the Wiknic for July 23 at Montrose Beach unless you have a reason for another date. I have been introduced to User:Aliceba. You have been a tremendous asset in community outreach and hope that you might be able to help us coordinate an event in Chicago.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:17, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
@TonyTheTiger: Hey Tony-- thanks for reaching out. Sorry, I was a little inactive due to being at Wikimania (in a primarily staff capacity as I had presentations to give and all) and a lot of follow-up afterwards. I'm unfortunately going to be away for most of July (I'll be away from Chicago from the 8th until the 25th), and don't have too much time to help organize a Wikinic for this year. I think the beach plan is a great idea. If you have a page setup, I can send a mass message to folks in the area to invite them. Thanks, I JethroBT drop me a line 18:07, 6 July 2016 (UTC)
I JethroBT, I just noticed your response. I have created Wikipedia:Meetup/Chicago 16. However, I am thinking we might do better nearer to Fullerton. I was also considering celebrating our new Maggie Daley Park. Also, I am willing to change it to the 30th if you want me to. The date and location are tentative until about July 14, when I will commit to something by attempting to publicize it.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD)
In the end I have decided to go with Maggie Daley Park. Help get the word out.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:15, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 July 2016

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

New Page

@Jethro please see Abu Esrar , my newly created page.senthoora poove —Preceding undated comment added 06:01, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 July 2016

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

Whisperback

You have new message/s Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 01:18, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 August 2016

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

You've Got Mail

Hello, I JethroBT. 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.

TH1980 (talk) 23:49, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 August 2016

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

RfC: Protect user pages by default

A request for comment is available on protecting user pages by default from edits by anonymous and new users. I am notifying you because you commented on this proposal when it was either in idea or draft form. Funcrunch (talk) 17:30, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 18

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 18, June–July 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi, Samwalton9, UY Scuti, and Sadads

  • New donations - Edinburgh University Press, American Psychological Association, Nomos (a German-language database), and more!
  • Spotlight: GLAM and Wikidata
  • TWL attends and presents at International Federation of Library Associations conference, meets with Association of Research Libraries
  • OCLC wins grant to train librarians on Wikimedia contribution

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 18

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 18, June–July 2016
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi, Samwalton9, UY Scuti, and Sadads

  • New donations - Edinburgh University Press, American Psychological Association, Nomos (a German-language database), and more!
  • Spotlight: GLAM and Wikidata
  • TWL attends and presents at International Federation of Library Associations conference, meets with Association of Research Libraries
  • OCLC wins grant to train librarians on Wikimedia contribution

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 September 2016

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

The Signpost: 06 September 2016

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

Thank you!

Thanks for inviting me to the Teahouse I appreciate all the help! <3

H0lly (talk) 02:38, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thanks for inviting me to the Teahouse I appreciate all the help! <3

H0lly (talk) 02:38, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for helping out with Wikki!

I just read your User Page and I appreciate your help! Thanks

H0lly (talk) 02:43, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Extended confirmed protection

Hello, I JethroBT. 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 Signpost: 29 September 2016

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

RfC for page patroller qualifications

Following up from the consensus reached here, the community will now establish the user right criteria. You may wish to participate in this discussion. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:55, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, I JethroBT. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 20:14, 7 October 2016 (UTC). 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.

Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 20:14, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Are you at the Conference

???--v/r - TP 20:52, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

@TParis: I'm here! Any interest in meeting up? I JethroBT drop me a line 22:38, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Anytime, I'm in the Wells Fargo room during the sessions recording them. But I'm up for drinks any time.--v/r - TP 22:41, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm headed to Cullen328's talk on the Teahouse until about 5:15, but I can meet with you afterwards, and am free this evening. Would you like to meet by the Wells Fargo Room on the fourth floor around then? (Also, thanks for recording the sessions!) I JethroBT drop me a line 22:45, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
TParis Ah, sorry. Forgot to ping you above. :P I JethroBT drop me a line 23:44, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
We have the photo at 5 - immediately after sessions.--v/r - TP 23:49, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
@TParis: Sadly, missed the photo (was chatting with Jim afterwards for a bit). Are you are at the lightning talks or the public policy discussion now? I'm at the Wells Fargo room; is there somewhere else I can meet you? I JethroBT drop me a line 00:21, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
@TParis: I sent an e-mail your way in case you want to get in touch with me by phone as well. I JethroBT drop me a line 00:27, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 October 2016

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

User:I JethroBT/Userspace RfC

See if the use cases I put on there are correct. — xaosflux Talk 23:21, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: Those cases look right to me. Thanks for providing these examples. I JethroBT drop me a line 02:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
I made a few more tweaks at User:I JethroBT/Userspace RfC. Go ahead and create your phab request. Be sure to link to the consensus RFC. Add me as a subscriber please. — xaosflux Talk 03:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge and Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 04:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Invitation from Wikipedia Asian Month 2016

Thanks for partipating Wikipedia Asian Month last year, and I hope you enjoy it. Last year, more than 7,000 articles contribute to Wikipedia in 43 languages in Wikipedia Asian Month, making us one of the largest event on Wikipedia. We will organize this event again in upcoming November, and would like to invite you join us again.

This year, we are lowering down the standards that you only need to create 4 (Four) articles to receive a postcard (new design), and articles only need to be more than 3,000 bytes and 300 words. We are also improving our postcard sending process, e.g. making the postcards right now, and collecting the address after the event ends without waiting other languges.

Wikipedians who create the most articles on each Wikipedia will be honored as "Wikipedia Asian Ambassadors". We will send you both digital copy, and a paper copy of the Ambassador certificate.

Thank you for considering! --AddisWang (talk)
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:46, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia Asian Month!

Hi there! Wikipedia Asian Month is about to start. Here is some information about participating in the event:

  1. Please submit your articles via this tool. Click 'log in' at the top-right and OAuth will take care the rest. You can also change the interface language at the top-right.
  2. Once you submit an article, the tool will add a template to the article and mark it as needing review by an organizer. You can check your progress using the tool, which includes how many accepted articles you have.
  3. Participants who achieve 4 accepted articles will receive a Wikipedia Asian Month postcard. You will receive another special postcard if you achieve 15 accepted articles. The Wikipedian with the highest number of accepted articles on the English Wikipedia will be honored as a "Wikipedia Asian Ambassador", and will receive a signed certificate and additional postcard.
  4. If you have any problems accessing or using the tool, you can submit your articles at this page next to your username.
  5. If you have any question, you can take a look at our Q&A or post on the WAM talk page.

Best Wishes, Addis Wang
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:57, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Books and Bytes - Issue 19

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 19, September–October 2016
by Nikkimaria, Sadads and UY Scuti

  • New and expanded donations - Foreign Affairs, Open Edition, and many more
  • New Library Card Platform and Conference news
  • Spotlight: Fixing one million broken links

Read the full newsletter



19:07, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016

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

Wikipedia:WikiProject United States/The 50,000 Challenge

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:40, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to Training Modules design conversation

Hello! We are leaving you this message because you have previously indicated that you interested in helping the Wikimedia Foundation Support & Safety team in developing our training modules this year.

We appreciate all the help and thoughts users like you have offered thus far. We would like to encourage you, if you are interested, to participate in the next step of our development: a community consultation about the design and structure of the modules. Note that we're not yet getting feedback on the content of the modules - a separate consultation about that will be starting soon.

In this "design" consultation, we're looking for advice on things like the best place to host these modules, the accessibility of content, and other potential design decisions. Please feel free to leave any thoughts you have about these things on the talk page. Thanks! (PS: I'm sending this to your volunteer account, but please let me know if it would be better sent to your staff one!) Joe Sutherland (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins

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) 20:33, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers

Hi I JethroBT.

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)

2 years ago today!

Wishing I JethroBT/Archive 16 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Mz7 (talk) 02:01, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

The Challenge Series

The Challenge Series is a current drive on English Wikipedia to encourage article improvements and creations globally through a series of 50,000/10,000/1000 Challenges for different regions, countries and topics. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are invited to participate.

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, I JethroBT. 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)

New Page Reviewer - RfC

Hi I JethroBT. You are invited to comment at a further discussion on the implementation of this user right to patrol and review new pages that is taking place at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC on patrolling without user right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:46, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 November 2016

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

The felicific calculus of adminship

Good morning. I hope you've been doing well since our last Chicago meetup. I'm weighing a decision which you might be able to offer some advice on.

An admin recently suggested that I run for adminship. This is something I've never pursued, for a couple of reasons. The advantages of having more tools available are clear, but I worry about having obligations imposed which would get in the way of my usual free-spirited gnomin', and possibly take the fun out of things for me. The RfA process is also a bit intimidating. In your experience with the title,

  1. Do you feel like a significant amount of your time is taken up by issues you wouldn't have been inclined to work on before becoming an admin?
  2. Are you often compelled to intervene in disputes which you would not have participated in before?
  3. What did you find most difficult about the RfA process? Looking at the page, I guess you didn't encounter much opposition, but some people do.
  4. Just how much dexterity is required for the secret handshake?

Thanks. Nick Number (talk) 15:59, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

@Nick Number: Hey Nick, good to hear from you. Your motivation and reluctance regarding adminship is definitely understandable. Let me talk about my experience with it to answer your questions:
Do you feel like a significant amount of your time is taken up by issues you wouldn't have been inclined to work on before becoming an admin?
Only very rarely. I've generally felt like I've had a lot of leeway to choose where I want to get involved. In those rare cases, there are long-term disputes that crop up that I've attempted to resolve before. If this happens repeatedly for a particular case/topic, and I'm asked to weigh in, I will sometimes decline and say that I've already offered the help/guidance I could, and don't feel like I have anything else constructive to offer. I've also declined to get involved in places where I don't feel like I have enough time to review the necessary context (e.g. prior discussions) to be helpful.
Are you often compelled to intervene in disputes which you would not have participated in before?
No, not compelled at all. I've been involved in some divisive areas, but that's definitely been by choice.
What did you find most difficult about the RfA process? Looking at the page, I guess you didn't encounter much opposition, but some people do.
Preparation took some time. One thing I did ahead of time was have discussions with a few other admins on-wiki and privately about various considerations for running. One admin did a sweep of my past edits to see what folks might ask about or what concerns they might have (I can do this for you some time, if you'd like). I also drafted responses to the first three RfA questions and passed them along to one or two other admins to gauge how it might be interpreted. I'm glad I did that, because I ended making some important changes to it in both language and content.
Another difficult matter was just me. Even though I got a ton of support at my RfA, I was a bucket of nerves through that week; I think that's pretty normal when your attitude, work, and intentions are being scrutinized, but it was stressful nonetheless. It helped to remind myself, "If my RfA doesn't succeed, it's fine. I'll just keep on contributing and working with editors like I always have. I can do a lot of good as an admin, but I don't need to be one." I think with dealing with opposition, it helps to be selective about what you respond to. Folks will come to your defense if an opposition claim is ridiculous.
I call this one...the bi bim bop.
Just how much dexterity is required for the secret handshake?
Everybody's got their own style. Just make sure not to practice by throwing boomerangs. :P I JethroBT drop me a line 22:20, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I really appreciate the input from someone who's been through the process. I am still weighing the decision. I'll try to avoid too much boomeranging in the meantime. Nick Number (talk) 15:36, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future.[1] The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey.[2]


The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Click here to take the survey now


You can find more information about this project here. This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement. For any questions or concerns, please visit our frequently asked questions page or send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org. If you do not want to receive future communication about this survey, please leave your username here.


Sincerely, Edward Galvez, User:EGalvez (WMF)


[1] This survey is primarily meant to get feedback on the Wikimedia Foundation’s current work, not long-term strategy.

[2] Legal stuff: No purchase necessary. Must be the age of majority to participate. Sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation located at 149 New Montgomery, San Francisco, CA 94105. Ends January 31, 2017. Void where prohibited. Click here for contest rules.

PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS A TEST MESSAGE AND NOT INTENDED TO BE A REAL SURVEY

Talk page protection - Bergdahl

Please restore the protection on the Bowe Bergdahl talk page. As soon as the protection expired the IP returned to repeat the ranting. Thanks. – S. Rich (talk) 04:26, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

@Srich32977: Done, thanks for the note. I JethroBT drop me a line 06:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

A pie for you!

lol i dont eben know who you are H0lly (talk) 00:12, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Hello I JethroBT: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, North America1000 15:30, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

The Signpost: 22 December 2016

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

Extended confirmed protection policy RfC

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 16:12, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

It's a beautiful time of the year!


Christmas tree worms live under the sea...they hide in their shells when they see me,
So with camera in hand I captured a few, and decorated them to share with you.
Atsme📞📧 15:41, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

@Atsme: Haha, pretty cool decor! Have a Merry Christmas, Atsme!  :) I JethroBT drop me a line 02:01, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Holiday greetings




Thank you for all you do for WP. Thanks for your assistance with obtaining photograpy clearances. My fingers are crossed. Merry Christmas and best wishes for a happy, healthy and productive 2017!
TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:22, 25 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)

The Signpost: 17 January 2017

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

Books and Bytes - Issue 20

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 20, November-December 2016
by Nikkimaria (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), UY Scuti (talk · contribs), Samwalton9 (talk · contribs)

  • Partner resource expansions
  • New search tool for finding TWL resources
  • #1lib1ref 2017
  • Wikidata Visiting Scholar

Read the full newsletter

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:00, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

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)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:I_JethroBT/Archive_16&oldid=1143054854"