Feedback request: Wikipedia policies and guidelines request for comment

edit
 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard on a "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 11:31, 11 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Feedback request: Maths, science, and technology request for comment

edit
 

Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia talk:Find your source on a "Maths, science, and technology" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:30, 17 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

edit
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Australian Survivor on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 18:30, 24 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Dirty old man on Wiktionary

edit

Hi, the definition on the page Dirty old man on Wiktionary is inaccurate. It is "an old or older adult male who acts in a lewd and lecherous manner", not a generic "adult male". Would you kindly fix it, please? 151.46.79.89 (talk) 21:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

You should post this on the relevant talk page on Wiktionary (or just change it yourself), I'm not going to have time to look for at least a couple of days I expect. Thryduulf (talk) 22:31, 30 September 2024 (UTC)Reply
But no one answers me there and the page is protected until 2029, and you are a Wiktionary administrator, right? 151.46.78.204 (talk) 13:02, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
If nobody is answering on the talk page try wikt:Wiktionary:Tea room. I am no longer an admin on Wiktionary. Thryduulf (talk) 13:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Aren't you still an autocofirmed user? Couldn't you fix it anyway? 151.38.59.219 (talk) 22:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
It depends on the protection level, but you should be asking in one of the venues I previously mentioned rather than badgering a random person on a different project. I won't be responding further to you about this. Thryduulf (talk) 22:41, 1 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2024).

 

  Administrator changes

 
 

  CheckUser changes

 
 

  Guideline and policy news

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous


Administrator Elections: Call for Candidates

edit

Administrator Elections | Call for Candidates

The administrator elections process has officially started! Interested editors are encouraged to self-nominate or arrange to be nominated by reviewing the instructions at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Call for candidates.

Here is the schedule:

  • October 8–14 - Candidate sign-up (we are here)
  • October 22–24 - Discussion phase
  • October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase

Please note the following:

  • The requirements to run are identical to RFA—a prospective candidate must be extended confirmed.
  • Prospective candidates are advised to become familar with the community's expectations of adminstrators, which are much higher than the minimum requirement of having extended confirmed status. This includes reviewing successful and unsuccessful RFAs, reading the essay Wikipedia:Advice for RfA candidates, and possibly requesting an optional poll on their chances of passing.
  • The process will have a one week call for candidates phase, a one week pause to set up SecurePoll, a three-day period of public discussion, followed by 7 days of no public discussion and a private vote using SecurePoll.
  • The outcomes of this process are identical to making requests for adminship. There is no official difference between an administrator appointed through RFA or administrator elections.
  • Administrator elections are also a valid means of regaining adminship for de-sysopped editors.

Ask any questions about the process at the talk page. A separate user talk message will be sent to official candidates with additional information about the process.

To avoid sending too many messages, this will be the last mass message sent about administrator elections. If you are interested in the process, please make sure to watchlist the appropriate pages. A watchlist notice will be added when the discussion phase opens, and again when the voting phase opens.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Brazil's "fictional language"

edit

Hi Thryduulf - I understand your point on the PlayStation Dos RFD and I agree with it in general regarding your reply - but there's additional context that the poster of that comment is from Brazil and is making a self depreciating joke about it (see their userpage - they've got a section about it). I don't want to make mountains out of molehills but it's relevant context in case the discussion goes further BugGhost🦗👻 00:18, 12 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the note, @Bugghost, that context is helpful. Thryduulf (talk) 11:10, 12 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello,First of all, I wish you good luck and success and stay healthy. Request to add sections

edit

Hello, I am Abduvaitov Sherzod. I am a contributor to Uzbek, Russian and English Wikipedia. Can I add sections from other Wikis to the Karaginsky Island article? Please give permission or guidance! Thank you. Happy editing! Abduvaitov Sherzod 0988 (talk) 16:30, 13 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment

edit
 

Your feedback is requested at Talk:Kiss (band) on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.

Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 14:31, 20 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Administrator Elections: Discussion phase

edit
Administrator Elections | Discussion phase

The discussion phase of the October 2024 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

  • October 22–24 - Discussion phase
  • October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
  • November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

During October 22–24, we will be in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages will open to questions and comments from everyone, in the same style as a request for adminship. You may discuss the candidates at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Discussion phase.

On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Small action leads to much appreciation

edit

Hello @Thryduulf,

I noticed you asked the same question of all the candidates over at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Discussion phase, namely “Why did you choose to seek adminship via election rather than via a standard RFA?”, which, while I’m sure it took but a second of your time to pose to everyone, was an important question to ask. The few candidates that have responded so far have provided very enlightening answers in response. Again, thanks! JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | 01:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Well, 11 minutes to do the asking plus a couple more to figure out the best phrasing, but you're welcome. Thryduulf (talk) 01:29, 22 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
I also came here to give thanks for mass posting this question. I think the answers to this question will reveal important information for the debrief after the election. In other words, it's basically asking the candidates what they feel are the pros of the administrator election format compared to RFA, which is useful info. So anyway, thank you :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:59, 22 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Invitation to participate in a research

edit

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC) Reply

Administrator Elections: Voting phase

edit
Administrator Elections | Voting phase

The voting phase of the October 2024 administrator elections has started and continues until 23:59 31st October 2024 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

  • October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
  • November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies for a vote will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Image syntax

edit

Hello, I see you are testing some image syntax in your sandbox. Are your testing in regards to invalid image option syntax errors, or would it be ok if the four tracked errors were addressed? Numbers 10 and 16 are claiming to have multiple captions due to the | after the intended caption, and 11 and 17 have the same sort of issue, just presenting differently with the empty parameter | | appearing before the intended caption. (the other cases of | | aren't an issue since no other caption appears in those cases)

Just asking since Invalid image options is one of the error types I've helped eliminate on Wikipedia, and I try to keep these from repopulating, with exception to intentional test cases. Thanks, Zinnober9 (talk) 16:20, 27 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

The context for the testing is Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Warn on inline image usage where your input would be extremely valuable. I'd rather you didn't adjust the syntax in my sandbox until that discussion concludes though as that might complicate things. Thryduulf (talk) 17:08, 27 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
No worries, that's why I asked, since (with the edit summary included) it looked more intentional and the table syntax was far better written than the usual popup cases from the random new users I see. I'll leave it be. Thanks for the info! Zinnober9 (talk) 20:12, 27 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Mothballed admins

edit

My words were inexact, but we have a number of admins who retired fully trusted by the community. Many of those might pickup the mop after demonstrating their competency (method to be discussed, for example a "re-election" much like the current admin election model). In addition we have many former admins who still edit regularly. I wish we had a system of "rehabilitating" former admins, who were trusted but had some issues. Former admins face an extra-ordinarily high bar for return, IMHO. I would like to see a path for re-briefing, re-entrusting, re-connecting with former trusted servants. No plan, just a desire to broaden our bench with people we already know. We let indef-blocked and banned editors rejoin the community but desysopped or retired admins rarely try to regain the mop. BusterD (talk) 15:30, 1 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

There is nothing preventing anyone who has been desysopped for activity from standing again at RFA (or elections if they continue), whether they are beyond the period of automatic reinstatement or not. If they demonstrated that they were familiar with current policies and cultural norms (and hadn't done anything since desysopping that would prevent someone gaining adminship for the first time) then they would easily pass. The reality is that most people who get desysopped for inactivity don't become active editors again, we can't know why in the majority of cases but assuming it is like other internet communities it will be a case of interests shifting over time and real life changes meaning they don't have the time they once did. Wikipedia hasn't been around long enough for those who were active as students who left because jobs and families took their time to return as retirees/empty nesters.
Of those that do return after extended absences, not all of them have an interest in becoming administrators again. Fixing RFA is probably the single thing we can do to bring back those who do return and still (or again) want to be admins, but even if we do that will have far greater impact on those who have never been admins. Energy spent in this regard is almost certainly going to be better focused at stopping admins becoming inactive in the first place, although nothing we can do (other than fixing the society of whichever real-world country they live in) will prevent the issues of time. Thryduulf (talk) 19:29, 1 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your well-considered answer. You caught me acting uncharacteristically emotional the other day, and just staring at your datestamp caused me to straighten up a bit. I don't like looking immature in front of people I generally respect. But worse, if I act badly, I want people I can count on to hold me to account. Thanks. I see we're getting eleven new admins with the election and not looking like losing either of the petitioned two (we might lose mostly inactive TonyUSMC for cause, which is a terrible look for us). So gather ye rosebuds... BusterD (talk) 20:31, 4 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Funicular railways in Slovenia

edit
 

A tag has been placed on Category:Funicular railways in Slovenia indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz Read! Talk! 18:45, 2 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

edit

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2024).

 

  Administrator changes

 
 

  CheckUser changes

  Maxim

  Oversighter changes

  Maxim

  Guideline and policy news

  Technical news

  • Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

  Arbitration

  Miscellaneous


Sandbox

edit

In case you didn't know, your Sandobox is listed at Lint Errors: Bogus file options. When you are done with this experiment, it would be great if you would blank the page or otherwise remove the four lint errors. Cheers! —Anomalocaris (talk) 22:22, 6 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

See #Image syntax above. Thryduulf (talk) 22:28, 6 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

On self votes

edit

Hi Thryduulf -- I note you hatted my draft question on this topic in my absence. Obviously in the current election a single vote either way would not make a blind bit of difference. But... imagine in future this process has been running for a while, and interest in it has substantially cooled. Say not particularly well-known admin EA has been recalled. If she chooses to endure a reconfirmation RfA she may not support herself; if she chooses to run at an administrator election, she may support herself. If the number of votes cast is low, then that single self vote can determine the outcome. Not particularly suggesting reopening but these things need to be considered carefully somewhere. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 01:30, 7 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

If you read the discussion it's clear that it is completely unenforceable and there is consensus against asking a question about it in the RFC. Indeed, you seem to be the only person to consider self-voting an issue. Thryduulf (talk) 08:16, 7 November 2024 (UTC)Reply