User talk:Robertsky: Difference between revisions
Quetzal1964 (talk | contribs) |
→Fishes: Reply |
||
Line 152: | Line 152: | ||
Can you tell me why the original request was not implemented? [[User:Quetzal1964|Quetzal1964]] ([[User talk:Quetzal1964|talk]]) 09:22, 8 December 2024 (UTC) |
Can you tell me why the original request was not implemented? [[User:Quetzal1964|Quetzal1964]] ([[User talk:Quetzal1964|talk]]) 09:22, 8 December 2024 (UTC) |
||
:@[[User:Quetzal1964|Quetzal1964]] those are contested as seen at [[Special:Permalink/1261835653]]. I routinely clear out requests with no activity in the last three days as stale. However, I missed out on your latest comment it seems. If you don't mind, I will restore the previous requests since there's some activity discussion. [[User:Robertsky|– robertsky]] ([[User talk:Robertsky#top|talk]]) 10:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 10:50, 8 December 2024
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
NOP for 152.58.93.148 ?
IP 152.58.93.148 Doesn't seem to be an Open Proxy Momosixer (talk) 11:34, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Momosixer I am using the information provided through mw:Extension:IPInfo. Currently it shows some proxy activity. Due to legal policy, I am unable to share further information. – robertsky (talk) 12:02, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal:IP_Information_tool_guidelines will fix link later – robertsky (talk) 12:04, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- From my own tests, it is highly unlikely that 152.58.93.148 is a webhost or a proxy. Your 1 year block seems unwarranted. Momosixer (talk) 12:21, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Momosixer Feel free to take it up at ANI. I don't know what tests or checks you have conducted but I stand by the information that was given to me through the toll. – robertsky (talk) 13:10, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- From my own tests, it is highly unlikely that 152.58.93.148 is a webhost or a proxy. Your 1 year block seems unwarranted. Momosixer (talk) 12:21, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
- https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal:IP_Information_tool_guidelines will fix link later – robertsky (talk) 12:04, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Tech News: 2024-49
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Updates for editors
- Two new parser functions were added this week. The
{{#interwikilink}}
function adds an interwiki link and the{{#interlanguagelink}}
function adds an interlanguage link. These parser functions are useful on wikis where namespaces conflict with interwiki prefixes. For example, links beginning withMOS:
on English Wikipedia conflict with themos
language code prefix of Mooré Wikipedia. - Starting this week, Wikimedia wikis no longer support connections using old RSA-based HTTPS certificates, specifically rsa-2048. This change is to improve security for all users. Some older, unsupported browser or smartphone devices will be unable to connect; Instead, they will display a connectivity error. See the HTTPS Browser Recommendations page for more-detailed information. All modern operating systems and browsers are always able to reach Wikimedia projects. [1]
- Starting December 16, Flow/Structured Discussions pages will be automatically archived and set to read-only at the following wikis: arwiki, cawiki, frwiki, mediawikiwiki, orwiki, wawiki, wawiktionary, wikidatawiki, zhwiki. This is done as part of StructuredDiscussions deprecation work. If you need any assistance to archive your page in advance, please contact Trizek (WMF). [2]
- This month the Chart extension was deployed to production and is now available on Commons and Testwiki. With the security review complete, pilot wiki deployment is expected to start in the first week of December. You can see a working version on Testwiki and read the November project update for more details.
- View all 23 community-submitted tasks that were resolved last week. For example, a bug with the "Download as PDF" system was fixed. [3]
Updates for technical contributors
- In late February, temporary accounts will be rolled out on at least 10 large wikis. This deployment will have a significant effect on the community-maintained code. This is about Toolforge tools, bots, gadgets, and user scripts that use IP address data or that are available for logged-out users. The Trust and Safety Product team wants to identify this code, monitor it, and assist in updating it ahead of the deployment to minimize disruption to workflows. The team asks technical editors and volunteer developers to help identify such tools by adding them to this list. In addition, review the updated documentation to learn how to adjust the tools. Join the discussions on the project talk page or in the dedicated thread on the Wikimedia Community Discord server (in English) for support and to share feedback.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
MediaWiki message delivery 22:20, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Question from Shollyk Smart (08:18, 3 December 2024)
How can I start my legacy introduction as a musician --Shollyk Smart (talk) 08:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Reverted 3 edits by Justice Chawla
Hi, you said "Reverted 3 edits by Justice Chawla (talk): The sitting judge shouldn't be commenting here at risk of fouling up the legal process". This is not a good reason to revert these, if this was the judge it is their business if they want to foul up the process or not, but none of our business. However, a good reason to remove these is because we have no idea if they are the judge or (more likely) someone impersonating them. If something like this happens again, please use the right description of why the comments get removed. WP:NLT would have been a good reason as well. Fram (talk) 08:38, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Fram Indeed, I could have been more accurate with the edit summary. The reversion was primarily due to impersonation concerns, of which I had blocked the account for at the same time, and I should have added that in the edit summary as well. Thanks for the message and I will keep this in mind for future similar actions. – robertsky (talk) 08:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – December 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2024).
Interface administrator changes
- Following an RFC, the policy on restoration of adminship has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
- Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, T5, has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.
- Technical volunteers can now register for the 2025 Wikimedia Hackathon, which will take place in Istanbul, Turkey. Application for travel and accommodation scholarships is open from November 12 to December 10, 2024.
- The arbitration case Yasuke (formerly titled Backlash to diversity and inclusion) has been closed.
- An arbitration case titled Palestine-Israel articles 5 has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 14 December.
A barnstar for you!
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For your tireless contributions to this project. Happy editing! Maliner (talk) 17:02, 3 December 2024 (UTC) |
- @Maliner thank you! – robertsky (talk) 04:19, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Query
Hello, Robertsky,
I was looking at an AFD tagged by a new editor, Dmitry Bobriakov, and their User page states they are a member of English Wikipedia conflict of interest volunteer response team
. I was unfamiliar with this group so I went to Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Conflict of interest reports and saw your name listed so I'm coming to you. I was wondering if you could tell me more about this "team", who is on it and what it does. Thanks for any insight. Liz Read! Talk! 01:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Ooops! It looks like I already asked the editor about this on their User talk page back in October. But I'd still like to get your feedback on this. Liz Read! Talk! 01:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Liz, the COIVRT team arose from Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Cases/2024#April case, in which there were private information being used to investigate into a COI issue involving an admin. After the case, the COIVRT mailing list was established. Admins can apply to the ArbCom to access it and also work on the reports there. Other than applying for access, other admins holding CU rights and on the Arbcom as well may access it. As such, other than the 4 admins listed on the page, CUs and ArbCom members have access as well. If the ArbCom elections is in your favour, you will also have access.
- If the COIVRT report warrants it, we may block accounts while tagging the block with [[ticket:2024xxx]] COIVRT or similar in the block log message. We don't do this often as this meant that whatever unblock decisions needed to be made, it will be restricted to only a few admins as the block decision is based on the correspondence.
- To my knowledge, the editor in question is not a member of the team. The editor might have submitted reports via the email which may have been handled and closed before I came onboard recently. Their userpage stated that they are "a volunteer who together with the team..." (shortened for brevity) sounds about right as it can be read that they are interested in hunting down COI editors and then sending the reports over for the team to review, akin to an editor reporting suspected socks at SPI then the SPI clerks/admins/CUs work on the report or one working on persistent copyright infringements by others. It just sounds... fluffy (WP:PROMO much?). – robertsky (talk) 04:11, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Fishes
HI I see you did not implement my requested move for Yunnanilus nigromaculatus to Eonemachilus nigromaculatus. The relevant project WP:Fishes agreed in October this year that the taxonomy used in fish articles, for taxa below the level of order, should follow Eschmeyer's Catalog of Fishes. That is what I was doing in this case. I have re-requested the move.
Can you tell me why the original request was not implemented? Quetzal1964 (talk) 09:22, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Quetzal1964 those are contested as seen at Special:Permalink/1261835653. I routinely clear out requests with no activity in the last three days as stale. However, I missed out on your latest comment it seems. If you don't mind, I will restore the previous requests since there's some activity discussion. – robertsky (talk) 10:50, 8 December 2024 (UTC)