User talk:Schwede66/Archive 26

Administrators' newsletter – July 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

Administrator changes

28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam¹ • Flyguy649 • Fram² • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe

¹Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

²Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

Bureaucrat changes

28bytes • WJBscribe • Wizardman

Interface administrator changes

MSGJ • TheDJ

CheckUser changes

Beeblebrox • BU Rob13 • DoRD

Oversight changes

Beeblebrox • BU Rob13 • DoRD • GB fan

Guideline and policy news

A request for comment seeking to alleviate pressures on the request an account (ACC) process proposes either raising the account creation limit for extended confirmed editors or granting the account creator permission on request to new ACC tool users.

In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

The scope of CSD criterion G8 has been tightened such that the only redirects that it now applies to are those which target non-existent pages.
The scope of CSD criterion G14 has been expanded slightly to include orphan "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects that target pages that are not disambiguation pages or pages that perform a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).
A request for comment seeks to determine whether Wikipedia:Office actions should be a policy page or an information page.

Technical news

The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.

Miscellaneous

In February 2019, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) changed its office actions policy to include temporary and project-specific bans. The WMF exercised this new ability for the first time on the English Wikipedia on 10 June 2019 to temporarily ban and desysop Fram. This action has resulted in significant community discussion, a request for arbitration (permalink), and, either directly or indirectly, the resignations of numerous administrators and functionaries. The WMF Board of Trustees is aware of the situation, and discussions continue on a statement and a way forward. The Arbitration Committee has sent an open letter to the WMF Board.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Date template

Thank you. There was one other article that I recall making that change to... Dawnseeker2000 07:41, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hi,

Please review some articles: Sobia Khan, Aalisha Panwar, Liaquat Ali Asim, Farouk al-Fishawy. Thanks. — Bukhari (Talk!) 13:24, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much!

For your help with North & South. Much appreciated! You are amazing.

Jenny Nicholls, Joanna Wane, Virginia Larson Tahatai (talk) 03:36, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Tahatai: No trouble. Unfortunatly, I didn't have much time during the day. I'm looking at Ken's Commons uploads now. Schwede 66 06:53, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Ken will appreciate that. A new user but he has shot much New Zealand architecture, landscape and people over the years, for himself. He uses Wikipedia so he appreciates its importance. Tahatai (talk) 20:01, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).

Administrator changes

Johnuniq • Kosack • Valereee

Ad Orientem • Ched • Gadfium • Jonathunder • Nick • Yelyos

Bald Zebra • Beetstra • Doug Bell • Journalist • Ruud Koot • Splash • Voice of Clam

Interface administrator changes

Dinoguy1000

CheckUser changes

RickinBaltimore

Oversight changes

Beeblebrox

RickinBaltimore

Guideline and policy news

Following a request for comment, the page Wikipedia:Office actions has been changed from a policy page to an information page.
A request for comment (permalink) is in progress regarding the administrator inactivity policy.

Arbitration

Editors may now use the template {{Ds/aware}} to indicate that they are aware that discretionary sanctions are in force for a topic area, so it is unnecessary to alert them.

Miscellaneous

Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.
Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:24, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

newspaper to work

F.Y.I, in Mountain Brook High School, you changed |newspaper= in the infobox. MB 02:05, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MB: Apologies. That's not good. That edit is supposed to fix formatting within references but the parameter is used elsewhere (like this ibox). I shall be more diligent. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Schwede 66 19:41, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AWB orphaning of article

Hi there, I noted AWB has been tagging articles as orphans when it is not. The definition of orphaned articles has been updated to An article with no incoming links, as per WP:Orphan. I believe the settings of the AWB you been using currently set it to at least 3 incoming links instead of 1. If you download the latest version of AWB, it should have the correct setting as well. Appreciate it if you can change the settings accordingly. --Xaiver0510 (talk) 04:51, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaiver0510: Thanks for your message. I had come across this problem before but it appeared to have fixed itself. Not so, it seems. I've checked the version that I have been using (5.10.0.0) versus the latest version available for download (5.10.1.0, which I have upgraded to) so that doesn't look to be too different. Reading the documentation, it says that the tagger module can be set under the 'Tools' menu but there doesn't seem to be anything there in relation to orphan settings. I'm a bit stumped. Any suggestions? Schwede 66 08:50, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Schwede66: Its best you ask over at AWB talkpage as I am not using AWB myself. Sorry that I cannot help you further on this.--Xaiver0510 (talk) 04:20, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaiver0510: I did quite a bit of reading up on that and in the end, I had to ask. Turns out the AWB documentation was wrong. It's been fixed and I've now been able to turn off orphan tagging (unless there are zero incoming links). Thanks again for the prompt. Schwede 66 10:05, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Schwede66: Thank you and you are welcome~! (back to de-orphaning... hahah) --Xaiver0510 (talk) 10:10, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hawke's Bay wine region

Hi. I re-added the tag. There are several items in the article which still need footnotes (e.g. "notable" items in a couple of sections, principle items in others). Could add citation needed tags, but it's easier to simply add the single tag at the top.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:49, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response, onel5969. I think it would be more successful to tag individual items rather than the article overall. The big tag is more suitable when the article is poorly referenced. Individual tags are best when referencing is ok with only a limited number of issues. With individual tags, those interested in the topic have a much better idea what other editors would like them to do. Schwede 66 02:27, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Taiarahia Black

Hi I saw you unprodded the above article. I probably would have done the same as it is not 100% sure they don't meet the notability criteria. That said I disagree with your comment that full professors in new Zealand are notable. The criteria WP:NPROF require a much higher standard than that. A full professor needs to have held a named chair position or distinguished professor appointment at a major institution to get a pass simply on their position alone. Named chairs exist in new Zealand universities unless I'm mistaken so this applies to New Zealand academics as well. --Dom from Paris (talk) 07:13, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Domdeparis: Having read the guideline again I now doubt it myself. There have previously been discussions where criterion 5 was argued to apply but I can't recall where I saw that. Maybe Stuartyeates could add some light to this question? Schwede 66 19:33, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pinging me User:Schwede66. User:Domdeparis: I have added some more refs and a few more details and links. It's worth noting that a professor in New Zealand and a professor in the USA are quite different things, most professional academics retire without having reached full professorship; I've never seen a NZ professor deleted at AfD. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:13, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that they are not the same thing but the guidelines are the guidelines. In countries where named chairs exist to pass criterion 5 they have to be a full professor and have a named chair position or distinguished professorship. But this is just one of the criteria. I would imagine that in AFD discussions the argument used was not "is a full professor so passes #5" as this would be clearly challenged but rather they meet one or more of the other criteria. Dom from Paris (talk) 23:18, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greta Thunberg

Hi, if I read the log right, you set semi-protection to expire in Aug 2020 at Greta Thunberg, but IPs with just one edit are still buggering the article. Is semi- pp working correctly ? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 11:39, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@NewsAndEventsGuy: Not sure whether it's working correctly or not. It's best to place queries like this on the article's talk page as it's relevant to a particular article. Schwede 66 19:34, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Implied criticism

I was the creator of the article 2019 Auckland local elections. In this edit summary you imply criticism of me. In creating the article, I copied and pasted the contents of 2016 Auckland local elections, which as you can see, has the macron version that you objected to. To be honest, I don't care for macrons, which are not part of any spelling in Maori or English and are only a guide to pronunciation. Unlike some other languages, such as French, where the cedilla is part of the alphabet. To sum up, I don't care that I got it wrong. Akld guy (talk) 22:00, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Akld guy: I had not looked up who had edited that nor how the article had come about. I'm sorry if you feel hard done by; that was certainly not my intention. Schwede 66 23:33, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK no problem. Akld guy (talk) 00:08, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Isaacs grading

I leave these things to people like yourself, that's just a copy and paste from another page. Eddaido (talk) 22:03, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddaido: My point is that your copy and paste should not include a rating. Please remove it from the assessment as it's likely wrong. Just leave the project names there when you paste it. Schwede 66 23:35, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was careless. People always come along after you put these things up (as you did) is my only excuse. Even if the rating system is light years behind I shouldn't make it worse. Eddaido (talk) 00:09, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Species and orphan tags

I have removed the orphan tag you placed on Aplocheilus kirchmayeri. It is my understanding that orphan tags are not appropriate for articles on species because they will always be linked to other articles according to their place in the taxonomic tree. As Aplocheilus kirchmayeri is a member of the genus Aplocheilus the article for the genus links to the article for the species. They are also linked to by categories such as Category:Fish of India. Quetzal1964 (talk) 10:05, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Quetzal1964: This would appear to be the same issue as discussed under “AWB orphaning of article” above. Schwede 66 16:58, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed, thanks for the response. Quetzal1964 (talk) 17:13, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Laszlo Bartok

Hello

I saw accidentally that there was this page on the rower László Bartók, for which I knew about his gold medal, that we still have in our family. I am his grand-son and would like some information on him or to understand why you created this article or if you a relative of him. Moreover in the history of your article, one contributor pretends to be her grand-niece. Unfortunately, it is not possible to send an email to her. I would like so much to get in contact with her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex Paris 1972 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex Paris 1972: Thanks for your note. You will find that I have written quite a few rowing articles (1038 of them if my count is right). So no, there is no particular reason why I started your grandfather's article. You will further find that as of sometime last year, every Olympic rower now has a Wikipedia article. You'd need a bit of luck to get hold of the self-acclaimed grand-niece as that editor did not log in. All that's recorded is an IP address and that is not necessarily assigned to a specific internet connection, or it may be the IP address of a public library. Either way, when you look at that IP address' edit history you will find a lot of vandalism. It would appear that different people edit from the address. All you can do is leave a message on the relevant talk pages and see whether that person is happy to get in touch with you: go here and maybe also here (with the latter, you would have to ask a question in relation to improving the article as otherwise, you'd be breaching talk page protocol). With regards to the gold medal that your family holds, if you could take a photo of it and make it available to Wikipedia, I'd very much appreciate that. Schwede 66 19:16, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]