Jump to content

User talk:Spencer/Archive 40

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 35←Archive 38Archive 39Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).

Administrator changes

added TJMSmith
removed Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

Interface administrator changes

added AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a 2019 RfC in favor of creating one such a policy.
  • A request for comment is in progress to remove F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a, which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
  • A request for comment seeks to grant page movers the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. The full proposal is at Wikipedia:Page mover/delete-redirect.
  • A request for comment asks if sysops may place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions?
  • There is a discussion in progress concerning automatic protection of each day's featured article with Pending Changes protection.

Technical news

  • When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
  • When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
  • There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:15, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Zlatko Kranjčar

On 4 March 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Zlatko Kranjčar, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. TJMSmith (talk) 02:42, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Block of new editor who created a new account as requested?

I'm not sure about your recent block of Natalya at MARCOM as a sockpuppet. LSCMARCOM was recently softblocked and the template for that block explicitly says "You may simply create a new account." We certainly need to work with this person on the serious issues of undisclosed paid editing and a clear conflict of interest but I don't think it's helpful to block her as a sockpuppet when our warning explicitly said that she could create a new account. ElKevbo (talk) 21:18, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

ElKevbo My apologies, I didn't realize that the previous block was a spamublock. Unblocked and left a COI message. SpencerT•C 21:20, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick and helpful reply! ElKevbo (talk) 21:21, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Please block this users.

History of the Burmese (talk),2400:AC40:700:B127:9A7:D3B1:83A1:9322 (talk) and Pechora-2m russia changed the numbers without describing any reason and any source.They did edits which deals with Vandalism at the List of equipment of the Myanmar Army page.2400:AC40:700:B127:9A7:D3B1:83A1:9322 (talk) is the worst.He made 12 twelve edits which deals with Vandalism.Even though I warned him,he didn't care and still doing that way.Therefore please block his IP address for unlimited time.Only one month is enough for other accounts. Thar thar lay(military observer) (talk) 08:35, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

ALmost all of these users have not received any warnings. If there is concern that these are all the same person, this request should be directed to WP:SPI. If it's an issue with the specific page, WP:RFPP is likely the best place to have this addressed. SpencerT•C 19:56, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion.Thar thar lay(military observer) (talk) 10:10, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Just block the /64

Hey Spencer. Are you familiar with TonyBallioni's essay, User:TonyBallioni/Just block the /64? I saw you blocked 2601:4a:857f:6c0:99e9:a2f5:5cea:af2c but 2601:4a:857f:6c0::/64 has been leaving us quite a mess over the last month; I think I got most of it but it might be worth a second look. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 02:49, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done SpencerT•C 02:50, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. IMO it was massive mistake when IPv6 support was rolled out not just treating all users on a single /64 as one. It's not just you. It's not just blocking. Seems most people don't even look at the /64 contribs half the time. But oh well. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 02:54, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
The option to block the /64 came out recently on Twinkle (or at least I just noticed it recently), and I'll see if I can set that as the default setting. SpencerT•C 02:55, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Suffusion of Yellow I don't see a checkbox for that on Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences. Perhaps that we should consider adding, so that it becomes the default. SpencerT•C 02:58, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
@Amorymeltzer: Good idea? Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 03:00, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Yeah — I'd actually thought about doing it originally. PR opened! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amorymeltzer (talk • contribs) 12:02, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

can you please block 2a02:c7f:5622:2000:d81e:44b5:8f8:1da8 they are deleting thing for no reason and i have warned them several times

please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedefender35 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Users should be warned on their talk page (see Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace.) I see no warnings on the user's talk page. After appropriate warnings, you can make a report at WP:AIV. SpencerT•C 18:19, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

ok ill warn them — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedefender35 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 9 March 2021 (UTC) Praxidicae is advertizing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedefender35 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Again, reports like this can be made to WP:AIV. SpencerT•C 18:31, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Joe Tait

On 13 March 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Joe Tait, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 00:26, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Elgin Baylor

On 23 March 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Elgin Baylor, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 03:51, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

TPA

Hi Spencer. Earlier this month, you blocked the account NasirRanjhyWala. You might want to revoke talk page access as well, because of this edit. I've also opened a case at SPI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/NasirRanjhyWala. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 07:24, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
  • Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

Technical news

  • When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
  • Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

The vandalism-only account

Thank you for blocking that vandal a few minutes ago! He’d definitely have damaged Wikipedia more if given the chance. 👍 Well done, my friend. HelenDegenerate (talk) 00:13, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Cheryl Gillan

On 6 April 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Cheryl Gillan, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:36, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

User:181.92.48.240

Can you please revoke talk page access? See diff #1016402803. Tol | Talk | Contribs (formerly Twassman) 00:11, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Also, block evasion of User:181.46.150.118. Tol | Talk | Contribs (formerly Twassman) 00:12, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
 Done I think the 181.46.x.x is already blocked? I think I rev-deleted everything but let me know if I missed anything. SpencerT•C 00:13, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
It looks like you got it all. Thank you! Tol | Talk | Contribs (formerly Twassman) 03:27, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Emmanuel Evans-Anfom

On 8 April 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Emmanuel Evans-Anfom, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. —Bagumba (talk) 13:35, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for DMX (rapper)

On 10 April 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article DMX (rapper), which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. —Bagumba (talk) 03:21, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Ady Steg

On 13 April 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Ady Steg, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Black Kite (talk) 12:52, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Peter Warner

On 14 April 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Peter Warner, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. —Bagumba (talk) 02:24, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

IP User 2600:8806:4006:A800:64EE:E063:FAF4:6361

Hello, I believe that User:70.31.171.67 is the same person as User:2600:8806:4006:A800:64EE:E063:FAF4:6361, who you blocked from editing for adding nonsense to airport articles. I think this difference speaks for itself. ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 01:15, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm on the fence about: the edits are to similar sets of articles but the edit content isn't similar. The other issue is that 71.31.x.x's edits have not been reverted, so it's unclear what's productive and what's not. SpencerT•C 03:14, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I'll go through the articles they've edited to verify whether or not the non-reverted content is productive or not. I'll get back to you afterwards. ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 03:21, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks; I may or may not be on, but if it looks definitely non-productive than go ahead to report at AIV. SpencerT•C 03:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:33, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

TPA

Hi Spencer. The IP editor 61.244.99.87 has continued to edit disruptively on their user talk page after you blocked them. You might wish to consider revoking talk page access as well. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Actually never mind, Ymblanter took care of it. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:09, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

username blocks

do you think that you could attempt to block the people who have been reported for username infractions? Thedefender35 15:32, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Those can be reported at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention, which I see you have found. I'm not active at UAA, so unless it's a Template:Uw-spamublock or Template:Uw-vaublock type of block, I tend not to be involved with username infraction blocks. Best, SpencerT•C 21:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Malaysian date vandal

Hi Spencer, thank you for blocking 183.171.126.99 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Do admins have the ability to revert all edits made by a particular user? It would save me a lot of time. Thanks. Citobun (talk) 04:37, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Citobun, I honestly have not done that before. Under options, all I see is a "mass delete" contribs, which is more if the user is the sole editor on articles. Do you have rollback? SpencerT•C 04:41, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Understood. I have Twinkle which I think provides the same functionality as Rollbacker rights. I'll tidy up after them shortly. Thanks again! Citobun (talk) 05:10, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Citobun Gave you rollback. I'm about to log off for the night, but open the IP's contribs and you'll see a rollback button. (Twinkle rollback at least gives me a confirmation message so it's not as fast). Usually you can click a bunch at once, and that can help speed things along. Check out WP:ROLLBACK and test it out in a sandbox if needed, but I'm sure you know what to do with it. Best, SpencerT•C 05:13, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much. It does seem quicker. BTW, the vandal is back already at 218.111.6.130 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)... Best, Citobun (talk) 12:14, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Spencer, please note potential return at 183.171.89.176 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Best, CMD (talk) 02:43, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

@Chipmunkdavis: I have blocked. However, since I am not always around, feel free to report to ANI or AIV and link to the LTA case page: Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Date-changing vandal from Malaysia. Best, SpencerT•C 03:40, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

removed Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Your email

Replied, but I used some words that probably sent it straight to your spam folder. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 19:09, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Received and replied. @Suffusion of Yellow: SpencerT•C 19:34, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thank you for inspiring me to contribute in ITN. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 12:45, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Explaining why we block users

So how do you block a User? Devinks1904 (talk) 21:49, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Blocking policy has the information you're looking for. Best, SpencerT•C 21:50, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

According to Template:Checkuserblock, It says "Users who are the intended target of a Range block may still appeal the block". Devinks1904 (talk) 22:31, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

For information about appealing a block, please see: Wikipedia:Appealing a block. SpencerT•C 22:37, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Who made Wikipedia:Appealing a block? Devinks1904 (talk) 22:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure who specifically authored the page. SpencerT•C 22:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

How many pages did you delete Spencer? Devinks1904 (talk) 22:58, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Well one reason that we block them is when they evade past blocks - like Devlinks here was doing... SQLQuery me! 23:12, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
SQL I figured there was something like this going on but wasn't able to do some searching. Also removed TP access on the account. SpencerT•C 23:15, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).

Administrator changes

added Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless
removed Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Emergent Biosolutions

You're welcome. I enjoy editing on Wikipedia. If it's not too much trouble, I have some questions on your edits on Emergent (which I thought were spot on.)

1. You added “…it is not clear whether Kramer was aware of production problems that had been identified in October and November 2020 when he made the trading plan.” Isn’t this a “have you stopped beating your wife?” statement? We cannot prove a negative. If it's unclear, does it belong in Wikipedia?

2. If I were an Emergent shareholder (which I’m not) I would certainly want the CEO to know about production problems at any time, particularly problems of this magnitude and gravity. Kramer should have known.

3. Then, what difference would it make for his stock sales? A 10b-5-1 plan is specifically created to remove the plan holder from any personal control activity in buying or selling shares in a company in which he may have access to insider information. It’s supposed to prevent plan holders from the innuendo that – because they had knowledge, they bought/sold stock as a result of that knowledge.

4. I 100% agree that detail on the 10b5-1 plan really does not belong in this article. But isn’t it fair to Kramer that readers know he had a plan and how it works? Maybe something like “Kramer's purchases and sales were made as part of a trading plan established under SEC Rule 10b-5-1 (link) that he adopted on November 13, 2020, relinquishing his control over selling and buying stock to the plan."Letita Bodicia (talk) 18:16, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Letita Bodicia, thanks for the message and with what you pointed out, I agree that the paragraph could use some rewording. I went ahead and made some changes here to add more about SEC Rule 10b-5 trading plans, clarify the timeline of events, and add new information about the Congressional investigation and shareholder lawsuit. I agree the previous wording was a little vague, but I think this more clearly sticks to the facts. Re: your above comment on 10b-5-1 plans, those don't necessarily prevent insider trading ([1]): The need to revisit Rule 10b5-1 has come about because of the insider trading windows that have opened up with speculation around Covid vaccine development. “That rule has been used a lot by [senior executives at] pharmaceutical companies,” said Taylor. Senior executives at those companies might have a three-month visibility into the likely trajectory of the vaccine development at their companies, he noted. “That’s what has brought the spotlight back onto that rule.” Definitely not saying that's what happened here (and thus isn't something that should be put in the article without clear sources), but it's worth noting for personal interest. Let me know what you think about the changes to the article. Best, SpencerT•C
You're welcome, again. Changes work for me; everything is clearer. Letita Bodicia (talk) 13:20, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hello again Spencer Spencer, in an edit to Emergent Biosolutions (COVID 19 – Production and Contamination Issues) on 6/13, you added this quote from a New York Times article “…distribution with a warning that ‘regulators cannot guarantee that Emergent BioSolutions...followed good manufacturing practices.’” (LaFraniere, Sharon; Weiland, Noah; Gay Stolberg, Sheryl (June 11, 2021). "The F.D.A. tells Johnson & Johnson that about 60 million doses made at a troubled plant cannot be used". New York Times. Retrieved 13 June2021.)

You did not include “…according to people familiar with the agency’s decision…,” as reported in the NYT. I suggest the quotation marks add veracity to the sentence, as they indicate direct content from a respected source. But the content comes from an anonymous provenance. This warning appears nowhere in the FDA document; the NYT attributes it to unknown “people.” Emergent has been responsible for some truly incompetent activity, but it seems the NYT and we (Wikipedia) are going out of our way to tarnish them. What do you think? Should we rewrite this, omitting the questionable quote?

Or perhaps, content from a different source: As of 15 June 2021, the FDA had cleared 25 million doses of the J&J vaccine for export. Burton, Thomas, 15 June 2021, FDA authorizes more COVID-19 vaccine doses from troubled Baltimore plant, the Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones and Co., New York NY

https://www.wsj.com/articles/fda-authorizes-15-million-additional-covid-19-vaccine-doses-from-troubled-baltimore-plant-11623803290

Letita Bodicia (talk) 15:09, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

My apologies in advance for any delays in reply given my off-Wikipedia schedule. Here is the June 11 FDA memorandum. It states that recipient countries must receive "full transparency regarding FDA’s determination that these batches were not made in compliance with cGMP [Current Good Manufacturing Practice] requirements." That sounds pretty similar to what the NYT has written and I'm not sure how this would show that NYT and Wikipedia "are going out of our way to tarnish them". Given that Canada used additional information and warnings from the FDA as justification for discarding J&J vaccine doses, this seems to merit inclusion in the article. The WSJ article is behind a paywall for me, but it sounds like the approval of an additional 15 million vaccinations is worth adding to the article. I was able to find another source that mentioned this, so I'll go ahead and add that to the article. SpencerT•C 21:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Also please feel free to use the article talk page or make additions to the article yourself too! I know this related to edits I made but I'm sure there are other things with the article that are going on, and I do not intend to gatekeep any contributions you may have. Best, SpencerT•C 23:11, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 June 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:16, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
  • An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news

  • IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

IP blocked for a year is back 1 day after expiry of block

Hi Spencer, IP 74.101.252.37 was blocked by you a year ago according to this record. On June 10 he blanked the talk page and on the 1st day after the expiry of the block started reverting edits. Can I leave this with you, or should I report it elsewhere? Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 13:07, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

I see that admin Fastily in May blocked a number of other IP editors, this time on the 172.58.227. range, but who — like this IP — are equally adamant about removal of reference to a nickname on the OBJ page. Apparently all evading block of Subway NYC64 account, itself a sock, which is equally invested in the OBJ nickname edit war. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 13:28, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for participating in my RFA

Thanks for your trust and support. I will need help learning the new ropes. Please let me know if you see something I should know, especially if I can help. BusterD (talk) 05:56, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for 2020 Summer Olympics opening ceremony

On 25 July 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2020 Summer Olympics opening ceremony, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 00:45, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:13, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

  • Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:19, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

2021 Haiti earthquake

Hi, there can you update the ITN the death toll is now 1,297 HurricaneEdgar 00:38, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Nvm already update HurricaneEdgar 00:52, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:45, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

readded Jake Wartenberg
removed Emperor • Viridian Bovary
renamed Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

WE gottta talk

WE gottta talk
we gotta talk ManeAnt123 (talk) 17:20, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 September 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

2021 Montana train derailment

Re the ITN credit and removal, what happened? Mjroots (talk) 05:29, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mjroots, this was an error on my part. I posted the Meng Wanzhou item, and accidentally clicked the "give credit" link for the Montana train derailment nomination rather than the correct nomination, and thus needed to revert myself for the incorrectly given credits. It looks like the Montana train derailment nomination has just been closed. SpencerT•C 14:45, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Ah right, now worries. Yes, closed as no consensus. No big deal. Mjroots (talk) 15:02, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Sockpuppet templates

I saw you blocked Zigmund jhaey javier and tagged them. It's not a big deal, but the sock categories are already included in the sockpuppet templates, no need to explicitly list the category. The sockpuppet templates can get kind of hairy; WT:SPI/C can provide support. Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:51, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you RoySmith! Will leave those out in the future. SpencerT•C 16:52, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Another thing you could do if you block a bunch of socks is to open a SPI report. Even if you've already blocked them, getting them listed is useful for future clerks. Just note that it's a pro-forma report, close it yourself, and it'll get into the archives. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:56, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
RoySmith Okay, I want to test this out since I just blocked User:TVSgoodHai, User:Aasimkhan7867khan86 and User:Carnewswala as socks of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Iamrealmohsin. Do I just add these straight to the archive? Or the main page, and then they'll get shifted automatically to the archive. SpencerT•C 17:03, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
The way the process works, you should open a SPI report as a direct subpage of Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigation. Once it's done (which may be immediately, if you self-close a pro forma report), a clerk will look it over to see if there's any problems and then archive it. But please leave the archiving to the clerks. SPI pages are fidgety to get formatted properly, so I strongly recommend that you use WP:Twinkle instead of trying to hand-craft it yourself. If you ping me in your report, I'll take a look at it. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:08, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 Done, thanks. SpencerT•C 17:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
  • Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
  • The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

  • Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
  • The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

RfA 2021 review update

Thanks so much for participating in Phase 1 of the RfA 2021 review. 8 out of the 21 issues discussed were found to have consensus. Thanks to our closers of Phase 1, Primefac and Wugapodes.

The following had consensus support of participating editors:

  1. Corrosive RfA atmosphere
    The atmosphere at RfA is deeply unpleasant. This makes it so fewer candidates wish to run and also means that some members of our community don't comment/vote.
  2. Level of scrutiny
    Many editors believe it would be unpleasant to have so much attention focused on them. This includes being indirectly a part of watchlists and editors going through your edit history with the chance that some event, possibly a relatively trivial event, becomes the focus of editor discussion for up to a week.
  3. Standards needed to pass keep rising
    It used to be far easier to pass RfA however the standards necessary to pass have continued to rise such that only "perfect" candidates will pass now.
  4. Too few candidates
    There are too few candidates. This not only limits the number of new admin we get but also makes it harder to identify other RfA issues because we have such a small sample size.
  5. "No need for the tools" is a poor reason as we can find work for new admins

The following issues had a rough consensus of support from editors:

  1. Lifetime tenure (high stakes atmosphere)
    Because RfA carries with it lifetime tenure, granting any given editor sysop feels incredibly important. This creates a risk adverse and high stakes atmosphere.
  2. Admin permissions and unbundling
    There is a large gap between the permissions an editor can obtain and the admin toolset. This brings increased scrutiny for RFA candidates, as editors evaluate their feasibility in lots of areas.
  3. RfA should not be the only road to adminship
    Right now, RfA is the only way we can get new admins, but it doesn't have to be.

Please consider joining the brainstorming which will last for the next 1-2 weeks. This will be followed by Phase 2, a 30 day discussion to consider solutions to the problems identified in Phase 1.

There are 2 future mailings planned. One when Phase 2 opens and one with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

Best, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Nobel Prize in Economics

On 12 October 2021, In the news was updated with items that involved the article Nobel Prize in Economics, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 00:28, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Urgent assistance needed

Hey Spencer, needed some urgent assistance from you. I was rushing some updates into Guido Imbens; however, in this edit [2], by force of habit, I ended up writing WP:ITNRD instead of WP:ITN. Please can you help me by making the visibility of the edit summary. I know Admins have the ability to mask edits / edit summaries, particularly to guard against some obscene edits etc. Please can you help me? I am feeling miserable about this one. Ktin (talk) 01:36, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

 Done @Ktin: SpencerT•C 01:38, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks a lot Spencer. I owe you one for this. Have a nice rest of your evening. Ktin (talk) 02:02, 12 October 2021 (UTC)


Comment

Spencer, I do not understand the Trabant21 account deletion and the deletion of the entry for Dazza del Rio. Dazza del Rio is a lowrider icon. You used speedy deletion U5 under the pretense that I am using Wikipedia as a host for my own content. I am not Dazza del Rio - I am a fan. Please advise on how the entry should be rewritten and submitted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trabant21 (talk • contribs) 09:56, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Talk

Why my page has deleted? 42.201.174.134 (talk) 22:12, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Which page was yours? Best, SpencerT•C 22:23, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

RfA Reform 2021 Phase 2 has begun

Following a 2 week brainstorming period and a 1 week proposal period, the 30 day discussion of changes to our Request for Adminship process has begun. Following feedback on Phase 1, in order to ensure that the largest number of people possible can see all proposals, new proposals will only be accepted for the for the first 7 days of Phase 2. The 30 day discussion is scheduled to last until November 30. Please join the discussion or even submit your own proposal.

There is 1 future mailing planned with the results of Phase 2. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

16:13, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:16, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:41, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

thanks for blocking HeyDude

I'm happy Lopbunny69 (talk) 16:44, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Re: User:MattKirby/sandbox

Hello Spencer, thank you for your feedback on the sandbox. I’m messaging you regarding: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:MattKirby/sandbox, which you submitted for Speedy Deletion. I only have a first draft of the original copy to go off of, but I provided citations and neutral copy to every historical line by my records. I could re-write the overview to be shorter and more concise, but I think removing the entire article for lack of neutral tone is egregious. This page I’m drafting is the byproduct of this company:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urthecast, and GeoSys, a considerably larger company. I’m seeking to adequately represent the business EarthDaily Analytics, with the purpose of redirecting the Urthecast entry to this one upon completion. Let me know what you think I should do to be more compliant, and next time let me know in advance when my sandbox will be deleted, because that was effectively a first draft, that I was still refining, content and formatting included. 18:45, 16 November 2021 (UTC) ~~User:MattKirby~~

Hi MattKirby, I did not delete your page; I only tagged it and provided notice on your talk page. If you have specific questions about the deletion, please refer those to the deleting administrator. Additionally, Wikipedia is is not a means for promotion, and articles built around that can be speedily deleted, as in the case of your sandbox article. For example, statements in your article like "Focused on data and analytics, it is developing world-first technologies in data services, satellite processing, machine learning and actionable insights. The insights allow companies across multiple industries to track long-term trends, monitor change, and take guided, strategic actions to better serve their customers and fulfill their missions." are clearly promotional. SpencerT•C 19:03, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Hello again, thank you for your feedback, I will certainly yield that the line lacks the neutral bias that WikiPedia strives on, but I do want to levy two counterpoints if I may; 1) It was a draft in a sandbox and not indicative of the final product, while that was third-party text, it was undergoing revisions. 2) That was not the majority of the article. The majority of the article was bulleted lists, flat and objective information, backed up by citations. I will take the rest of my argument to Explicit since that is the executor of your submission, but personally, I think a content revision of the opening paragraph was all that needed to be merited and instead the entire page is nuked. MattKirby 01:39, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
The vast majority of the info in the article was about business transactions and products offered by the company, with additional promotional language present ("proprietary cutting edge synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and optical cameras"). This is quite common for non-notable promotional articles for articles created about businesses on Wikipedia deleted under G11. As noted in Conflict of interest, "editors with a COI are sometimes unaware of whether or how much it has influenced their editing", and that appears to be the case here. It would be highly recommended that if the company were truly notable, then someone entirely unaffiliated would create an article about it. (That said, you have noted receiving payments from an advertising firm to create an article so this isn't the case in this situation). I would also recommend you review Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) as well, particularly related to independent sources (press released-based articles in SpaceNews and SuccessfulFarming would be considered dependent coverage and insufficient to establish notability). SpencerT•C 06:36, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Young Dolph

On 18 November 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Young Dolph, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:59, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Request

I found I’m blocked from editing on wiki. Please note I haven’t logged into my account since 2016. Please review the errant block and remove it. Otherwise wiki will have to thank your erroneous judgment (or system) next year when I withhold my donation. Best regards foreverNbernstein (talk) 09:56, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Hi Nbernstein it does not appear that you are blocked. If this is for another account, please review WP:UNBLOCK and follow the instructions listed there. SpencerT•C 18:50, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed 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 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:47, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).

Administrator changes

removed A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news

  • Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
  • The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of countries by largest and second largest cities

Notice

The article List of countries by largest and second largest cities has been proposed for deletion. The proposed deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sikonmina (talk) 03:57, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

No opposition from me, thanks for the ping. SpencerT•C 04:00, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Blocked user Revision Deletion

Hi, you have blocked the user. Probably one of its edit summaries should be deleted: [3] -- Ben Ben (talk) 00:29, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done Thanks, SpencerT•C 00:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
There is a second one: [4] Sorry, didn't see it at the first attempt. -- Ben Ben (talk) 01:08, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Deleted sandbox

Hey, why you deleted my sandbox page? It was draft for me! Now all my job is gone, please retrieve the page... -- Andrew.bald (talk) 08:50, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Andrew.bald, I did not delete your page; I only tagged it and provided notice on your talk page. If you have specific questions about the deletion, please refer those to the deleting administrator Fastily. Additionally, Wikipedia is is not a means for promotion and not a web host, and articles built around that can be speedily deleted, as in the case of your sandbox article. For example, statements in your article like "The product is designed to be hardware-free, meaning it can be integrated with any legacy infrastructure, and scaled up or down to support compliance with cybersecurity requirements for widespread distributed workforces." or "NordLayer’s product offering provides companies with a simplified security platform..." are clearly promotional. SpencerT•C 16:01, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Richard Plepler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Big Little Lies. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Partially blocked IP disruptive editing

Hello, an IP that you previously blocked for disruptive editing is making disruptive changes at Moloch.—Ermenrich (talk) 21:25, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

It's not clear how those edits relate to the partial block I placed; in that case, it would make sense to warn the user first. My activity can be irregular so depending on urgency, AIV may give you a faster response. Best, SpencerT•C 22:49, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

IP block

This IP you partially blocked is a notorious spammer on the the French WP as can be seen by the spam of the same link he/she does on WP fr (WP:DUCK). I think you should block the user and put the link he/she spams on the blacklist. See here and here.
I personally think the IPs of this user should get a global WP ban. Veverve (talk) 13:44, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
I just recently noticed that on WP fr the IP now uses Pastebin to avoid the blacklist filter (see my recent admin intervention request there). Veverve (talk) 14:00, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

My block is unrelated to these current edits. What I would recommend is to request a global block for this IP. Not sure if the level of abuse locally on en.wiki has otherwise led to a need for a block/link blacklist. SpencerT•C 14:51, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 December 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:09, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Chobani help

Hi Spencer, nice to meet you. I noticed that you recently marked my edit request at Talk:Chobani as partially done, awaiting feedback. I have posted a reply there and was hoping you might be willing to take a look at it. Looking forward to your thoughts. Thanks for your time! Kait at Chobani (talk) 17:06, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi Kait, I lean toward agreeing with Paradise Chronicle and as the "another editor to take a look at [your] request", I marked your request as such. Indeed, the current article has a lot of promotional statements (e.g. focus on product lines) that need cleanup, and the article as a whole could be better organized. The history section seems to be a catch-all timeline with products, media appearances, community involvement (despite a separate community section), employee-related info (could be a separate section on employees). SpencerT•C 06:01, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

RFA 2021 Completed

The 2021 re-examination of RFA has been completed. 23 (plus 2 variants) ideas were proposed. Over 200 editors participated in this final phase. Three changes gained consensus and two proposals were identified by the closers as having the potential to gain consensus with some further discussion and iteration. Thanks to all who helped to close the discussion, and in particular Primefac, Lee Vilenski, and Ymblanter for closing the most difficult conversations and for TonyBallioni for closing the review of one of the closes.

The following proposals gained consensus and have all been implemented:

  1. Revision of standard question 1 to Why are you interested in becoming an administrator? Special thanks to xaosflux for help with implementation.
  2. A new process, Administrative Action Review (XRV) designed to review if an editor's specific use of an advanced permission, including the admin tools, is consistent with policy in a process similar to that of deletion review and move review. Thanks to all the editors who contributed (and are continuing to contribute) to the discussion of how to implement this proposal.
  3. Removal of autopatrol from the administrator's toolkit. Special thanks to Wugapodes and Seddon for their help with implementation.

The following proposals were identified by the closers as having the potential to gain consensus with some further discussion and iteration:

  1. An option for people to run for temporary adminship (proposal, discussion, & close)
  2. An optional election process (proposal & discussion and close review & re-close)

Editors who wish to discuss these ideas or other ideas on how to try to address any of the six issues identified during phase 1 for which no proposal gained are encouraged to do so at RFA's talk page or an appropriate village pump.

A final and huge thanks all those who participated in this effort to improve our RFA process over the last 4 months.

This is the final update with no further talk page messages planned.

01:47, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Chobani, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Banza.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A t-shirt!
A token of thanks
Hi Spencer! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~
A snowflake!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Happy New Year Spencer! Hope this ping finds you well. Wishing the new year brings along all the joy and happiness you can wish for! Ktin (talk) 02:27, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

2A04:CEC0:1000:0:0:0:0:0/39

It looks like 2A04:CEC0:1013:24A9:B559:8476:A96B:C4BF (who is partially blocked) has developed an obsession for another BLP article. Would it be possible to add that one too to the list? Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 23:07, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

M.Bitton These edits don't appear to be linked to those involved in the range block (those are related to East African topics), so I just did a 31-hour block for this user. SpencerT•C 23:11, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
Nevermind, I am mistaken. Let me take a closer look a the rangeblock settings; I've had several requests to add pages to the partial block, so it is clear that this is not a sustainable solution. SpencerT•C 23:13, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
Given the wide range of edits on the IP's range, it's hard to tell exactly what could be from one person or not. It's a French IP that presumably has African diaspora users (or users with interests in those topics). I think a 31-hr block on the more limited range is reasonable to start at; I'll try to keep an eye on things. Best, SpencerT•C 23:17, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm fairly confident that the IP belongs to Noname_JR (a LTA with a history of similar edits). The block will probably stop them for a while. Best, M.Bitton (talk) 23:19, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The functionaries email list (functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you for your efforts against vandalism!! 😊👍 Kpddg (talk) 05:57, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Help request for minor edits to Ziff Davis and its CEO article pages

Hi Spencer,

It's Jeremy from Ziff Davis --- thank you very much for your help in implementing our recent edit requests. I'd greatly appreciate it if you could check our recent requests for editing the Ziff Davis employee count in the Infobox, see edit request here (bottom of page), and edits to Ziff Davis' CEO article page, Vivek Shah, which reflect his current role, see edit request here.

Please let me know any feedback you have --- thank you again for your help!

Jeremy

JeremyJonesZiffDavis (talk) 19:41, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

User talk:64.46.14.136

TPA being revoked might be in order here and perhaps a longer block? Just a suggestion, though, as the choice is obviously up to you. Amaury • 05:39, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

TPA revoked, thanks. I tend to start with 31 hours unless there is prior abuse/blocks/block evasion (which I didn't notice for this case; please let me know if so) and then extend if issues continue after the block expires. Hard to know if the the IP will change anyway and the disruption will continue. Best, SpencerT•C 05:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Looks like they changed IPs, as you predicted. Probably page protection is the best option here. Amaury • 22:24, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Perhaps there is room to include both the current information and the new information linked by the IP in the article. e.g. "In (year), Bure stated that (x political views); subsequently in 2020 she stated (y)". Seems like a registered user brought this up on the talk page (Talk:Candace_Cameron_Bure#Revisiting) but then there was no additional discussion. SpencerT•C 22:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Many thanks for helping keep AIV under control -- TNT (talk • she/her) 06:31, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
TheresNoTime Thanks mate, it's seemed particularly backlogged over the past couple weeks every time I've been on. Not sure if it's a holiday respite for some admins or the new normal. SpencerT•C 01:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Vandal report

I'm not exactly sure what's going on since I'm not too familiar with the subject area. Perhaps WP:AN would be a better venue to figure this out? SpencerT•C 17:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Revdel?

While your still around please revdel the edits of this user. Pure blp violations. Cheers --Megan B.... It’s all coming to me till the end of time 22:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Synoman Barris Already done! (Let me know if there's something I missed). SpencerT•C 22:27, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Hi Spencer,

Thank you for your feedback and edits on the Primary Hyperoxaluria page. Iciplascarfern (talk) 20:28, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

User:Brenfarrell/sandbox,

Hi Spencer,

Thank you for taking the time to review my article yesterday. Obviously it was flagged for speedy deletion but I was just wondering if there was one specific aspect on what I had written that stood out as a reason for deletion? Was it mainly linking to the Neilson Financial Services website? Any advice you could give would be greatly appreciated as I'm new at this.

Thanks a million,

Brendan.

78.18.72.163 (talk) 09:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC) 

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Brenfarrell (talk • contribs) 09:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

--Brenfarrell (talk) 09:50, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

What is your relationship with Neilson Financial Services? SpencerT•C 17:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Spencer. I'm an employee and recently noted that a several other financial institutions have Wikipedia pages:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SunLife https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparethemarket.com https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneysupermarket.com https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_London_Group

It's essentially a side project for myself and for practice as I have several other pages in mind. We don't stand to gain anything here as we're a non-customer facing brand.

--Brenfarrell (talk) 10:40, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Given that you are an employee of Neilson Financial Services, please review the information I left on your talk page as it relates to Conflict of Interest on Wikipedia. SpencerT•C 16:57, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Request deleting official by actress Park Shin Hye

Hi,manager Wikipedia, I am actress Park Shin Hye and many try again with all emails and administrators contact, so you do faster deleting part spouse and partner and personal life type your and bot users you because if you don't I can and I forcing report all administrators Wikipedia to manager official internet and social networks . 83.123.253.204 (talk) 06:11, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Speedily deletion

Hello Spencer I was notified this morning that my page was deleted for not complying with section U5. I shall not repost until fully aligned with the wiki guideline. However, I kindly request retrieving the contact I had originally wrote before being deleted. Could you please forward the content and send it to my email (ewavestudios@zohomail.com)

Many thanks Mo Gade Mohamed Gade (talk) 10:36, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Socks

Hi, you recently blocked Special:Contributions/Millitaryactor. Special:Contributions/Licionfreeman is making the same types of edits on the same or similar articles. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 06:42, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Speedy service is always appreciated! BilCat (talk) 06:47, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Not typical for me, but just happened to be on when you left a message! Best, SpencerT•C 06:48, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
No problem! I saw you had made recent edits, and were obviously familiar with the master already. BilCat (talk) 06:50, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Speedily deletion (2)

Hello Spencer, I also have a question about the deletion of the Draft:ConvertKit. I do not believe it violates any policy but did not have an opportunity to contest. At the very least, I would like to recover the work.

TY Loquimur — Preceding undated comment added 14:52, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Loquimur, what question do you have about the deletion? The message on your talk page describes why it was deleted (by someone else, not by me). Additionally, what is your relationship with ConvertKit? SpencerT•C 16:50, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Why was my page not true?

I just noticed that you have deleted my wiki page I made about a TikTok group that I am the founder of. What in the description was not right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joonamd (talk • contribs) 23:56, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

User:Sauraved

A few days ago you blocked Sauraved for 31 hours for persistently adding unsourced or poorly sourced content. You asked folks to let you know if Sauraved's disruption continued. They're right back at it, with this series of edits, for example, inflating numbers wildly without regard to the cited sources (or any other that I can find). The more I see of their "contributions", the less I think they're here to build an encyclopedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 02:42, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, reblocked for one month. I get the WP:NOTHERE but assuming good faith, the editing pattern could be constructive if there are refs (and doesn't really fit the examples given in NOTHERE), so willing to give one more try before an indef block. Will keep an eye on things. Best, SpencerT•C 02:48, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Request for help on Talk:Welfare Stare

Not the right venue for continued discussion about this. SpencerT•C 06:02, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I am requesting help on the Talk:Welfare State page. I was commenting on the talk page in response to others who had posted there, and every single thing I posted was deleted with an accusation of "soapboxing". This is a false accusation, I posted two comments to suggest improvements to the article and one to answer someone else's question with some factual information which does not belong on the article itself. As far as I can see the person who censored me is politically motivated to censor everything to do with the concept of welfare. I cannot see who reverted most of my edits in the History Page, I only see the word Reverted next to every edit I made, hiding the person responsible for this censorship. I know that User:Mako001 reverted some or all of what I typed because he wrote an incoherent accusation on my talk page about how answering someone's question is inappropriate soapboxing, with no reference to anything resemblig Wikipedia Policy, although he didn't even bother trying to justfy deleting my two comments on improving the article. I tried to re-type my deleted Talk comments and they were all instantly deleted by another censor named User:Kinu. So that's the 3-revert edit war started now by User:Kinu. I am sick and tired of every single thing I ever type being censored instantaneously by politicians. I am looking for a neutral admin to put a stop to this edit warring and political censorship. 2601:441:4400:1740:7CBB:F534:DB2F:42BC (talk) 03:41, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I looked at the History to find out who was censoring me. Is there someone else I can talk to, to get help? 3 reversions is an edit war, right? I need help. Where can I report this edit war? 2601:441:4400:1740:7CBB:F534:DB2F:42BC (talk) 03:46, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
Have you reached out via talk page to either editor to discuss your concerns? That typically is the first step before reverting back and forth. SpencerT•C 03:48, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
Yes I did, in the past this has never gotten me anywhere with people who vandalize and delete my contributions. Almost everything I have ever contributed to Wikipedia has been deleted within a day by some vandal who does not justify it, and when I try to Talk to them, they never reply. 2601:441:4400:1740:7CBB:F534:DB2F:42BC (talk) 03:50, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
In the past I've also tried discussing unjustified deletions and vandalism on the Talk pages of the article vandalized, and again, the vandals never reply to me. They're vandals. 2601:441:4400:1740:7CBB:F534:DB2F:42BC (talk) 03:52, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure there's anything I can add in this situation, but I encourage you to read Wikipedia:Edit warring for additional information about reporting edit warring since that seems like you biggest question. Best, SpencerT•C 03:54, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
There is clearly some sort of required format on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring that I don't understand how to use/apply, and providing links that I don't know how to generate. I need help even knowing HOW to report because there are no instructions. 2601:441:4400:1740:7CBB:F534:DB2F:42BC (talk) 04:01, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
You can see that User:Mako001 made 3 reversions to that Talk page in the space of a few minutes. I don't know how to link to edits but I will try. 2601:441:4400:1740:7CBB:F534:DB2F:42BC (talk) 04:05, 30 January 2022 (UTC) [[6]] [[7]] [[8]]
By the way, I did not break WP:3RR, nor was I even close to edit warring. So reporting me will just boomerang especially since you have been accusing me of vandalism and censorship. Mako001 (C)  (T)  04:28, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
Yep, please sort this out. My "incoherent" message was a template, and it was initially the wrong one, but that was fixed. Notice how no-one has removed the additions that you made that were actually related to building an encyclopedia? Mako001 (C)  (T)  04:24, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
You did delete my comments about whether or not the article belongs in the Social Democracy Series, and your only justification was to accuse me of "soapboxing". "Soapbox" is a political term of personal attack used by politicans to attack politicans they disagree with. It has no place in civil discussion anywhere. And I tried to engage you on your talk page, I'm waiting for you to resolve this dispute with me civilly. 2601:441:4400:1740:7CBB:F534:DB2F:42BC (talk) 04:42, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The Signpost: 30 January 2022

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:22, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

1982 Ethiopian–Somali Border War

This page carries false information changed by vandals and the page was locked so therefore people can’t correct so i am asking you to unlock the page. Invasinoer (talk) 23:15, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Please make any edit requests on the article talk page here: Talk:1982 Ethiopian–Somali Border War. Add {{request edit}} at the top and be sure to include any references for the information to be added. SpencerT•C 23:16, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

User:JoudiYassine

Hello, Spencer,

I was surprised to see that you removed talk page access when you blocked this editor as they hadn't abused their user talk page. I realize that they are unlikely to become a productive editor on Wikipedia (as they were only focused on their autobiography) but it's important that if they have questions about a block or about how to request an unblock they have the ability to ask for help. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 22:20, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Liz My apologies, for some reason I thought there was talk page spam involve when I was reviewing the user's contributions but on second look I was mistaken. I have restored talk page access. Thank you for bringing this to my attention, SpencerT•C 23:02, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections.
  • The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Bill Fitch

On 3 February 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Bill Fitch, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 23:19, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Global Block request

Please block this IP range https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:2402:3A80:1C46:D09C:3926:B13B:5ADE:6A75 117.226.238.142 (talk) 17:04, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

I am unable to perform global blocks; see Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Global_blocks for how to request this. SpencerT•C 19:48, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

NPP request

Hello I made a request to be a New Page reviewer over a week ago but had no response, I kindly ask you if you have time to review my request. Thanks Trains2050 (talk) 11:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Trains2050, I admittedly do little with new page reviewing, so I am not the best person to respond to the permissions request. You seem to have a good amount of experience so this is not a knock on you. Give the request a little more time at the requests page, and hopefully someone will drop by within the next couple days. Another recommendation is looking for an admin who has previously granted new page reviewer requests (if you look through the RFP/NPR archives those might have other names worth trying?). Best, SpencerT•C 17:34, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Betty Davis

On 11 February 2022, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Betty Davis, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 19:06, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Raw Story update

Hi Spencer, this is Nathalie at RS. I replied to your post over at the Raw Story page and was wondering if you'd had a chance to look at my reasoning. Happy to discuss further about including those papers if you would like. Thanks for taking time to review! Nathalie at RS (talk) 15:27, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Nathalie at RS, see my reply on the talk page there. SpencerT•C 17:08, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Could you protect ITNC?

Some pest is creating new accounts and being a general nuisance at WP:ITNC. Maybe 12-24hrs of semi should do the trick. Thanks. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:35, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

 Done SpencerT•C 17:36, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Spencer/Archive_40&oldid=1190253618"