User talk:Thryduulf/archive21

3151:

AN..." per WP:AEBLOCK when you unblocked. I agree that it is currently leaning more towards support for unblock now that earlier, but I still must very strongly disagree with your decision to unblock so early in the discussion. Despite there being prior discussion elsewhere, AN is a different forum and has a different audience. I'm sorry that you aren't willing to hear or understand my concerns in this regard. Note that it took you 6.5 hours (far more than the 3.5 hours you allowed for discussion) to respond to my concerns here even when you were pinged and had only just made the unblock less than an hour prior, how is a concerned editor supposed to have time to voice their concerns at a venue which they may not be pinged to in such a short period of time? I was even active on Knowledge during this discussion period and didn't even realize a discussion was taking place until after you unblocked. As an administrator, you are most certainly aware that building a clear community consensus takes time, even if a discussion seems to swing far to one end of the pendulum at the start. If you will not reconsider your decision, then that is most unfortunate especially. Best wishes, and thank you for your time.

8192:

patrolled. This defeats the purpose of new page patrolling, when you give it an editor whose creations should still be patrolled (like me for example). There is no community consensus to exempt arb clerks from having their mainspace creations patrolled like the rest of us, and it's inappropriate for you–who admits to not being familiar with this–to unilaterally make this exception. (It would still be inappropriate even if you were familiar.) And by "inappropriate", I mean "abuse of tools". Responding by saying that either you're right or the info page needs to be rewritten is also inappropriate, by which I mean, "not compliant with ADMINCOND". (Sorry, but the gentle approach clearly isn't working.) Correct me if I'm wrong, but this was literally the first time you've ever given anyone the autopatrolled right. Why you think you know better on this issue is beyond me. Please self-revert.

8363:

information page, explicitly to be given to users who are trusted not to violate core policies. It's not about not being explicitly told not to do something, it's that the page explicitly indicated that it would be fine to do it. This is why the page needs to be significantly rewritten - what it says is and is not permissible is very different to what those who work in the area say is and is not permissible. It also sounds from these discussion that the right shouldn't be granted automatically to administrators - I've been here 15 years and have created way less than 25 articles and there are plenty of other administrators who were granted the tools because of their non-content work, so there should be no reason for our contributions to skip the patrol queue. I've already indicated that I have no problem with someone else removing the rights, but

8231:, who evidently has the right to mark pages as patrolled, which is explicitly stated as a big deal, would not spend his time doing so or spend time making a request about it). I think I implied it earlier, but I'll now make it explicit, that any admin can remove the right from the two people I gave it to, I'm not going to do it myself right now as I'm tired and worked up about this so I'm not in anywhere near the correct frame of mind to be making any admin actions. However I do not agree that pointing out a fundamental contradiction between the explicit wording of the information page and the apparently intended meaning of the information page is something that can be dismissed as a minor misunderstanding. 5965: 5678: 6091: 5915: 7067: 4794: 3575: 1882: 248: 8300:, you don't appear to have ever marked a page as patrolled or granted autopatrolled to a user. Since this really has nothing to do with the committee, we ought to defer to admins, like Barkeep49, who are active at NPP/PERM and familiar with the guidelines. We have had problems with otherwise experienced users misusing autopatrolled in the past and there is really no reason for arb clerks to have it. If it's okay with you Thryduulf, I suggest we reverse the grants and look at revising the guidelines to better match the current practice at 3077: 5908: 5901: 2970:

been ~3.5 hours of discussion before you unblocked which is an absurdly short period of time to establish any sort of consensus. In addition to several opposes in the discussion, there was certainly substantial opposition to an unblock on Ritchie's talk page. I would not call the discussion that has occurred so far "consensus to unblock". Forgive me for being confrontational, but I really do find this action very disturbing. I would ask that you please self-revert and allow the discussion to play out at AN per

777: 9271: 9156: 7668: 7646: 7615: 7571: 6971: 6239: 6041: 4805: 4773: 3642: 3586: 3504: 1829: 1198: 315: 183: 9676: 8714: 7324: 6650: 5403: 4027: 2205: 1493: 536: 9453:

using a photograph and even advised me how easily it can be done. Also, I had retired in 2014 when I returned to WP - I refer to it as "semi-retired" because the ranching business is like Hotel California. Anyway, I documented my early experiences in a collapsed section on my user page under the section title "The first few years", and the subsection "2015 learning highlights". It may or may not help clarify things ... and then again, it may not be worth the time or effort to even worry about it.

5584: 9281: 9249: 9166: 7585: 7078: 7052: 6981: 6391: 6257: 4783: 4723: 3704: 3652: 3560: 3530: 1957: 1927: 1893: 1847: 1276: 1246: 1212: 325: 293: 259: 213: 8074: 9131: 7550: 9184: 1865: 9214: 9142: 7561: 6949: 6353: 6307: 6221: 4709: 3674: 3620: 3482: 1819: 1180: 165: 2721: 9203: 7604: 3549: 4572:

Generally it is best applied when the person on the receiving end feels they deserved it now they have the benefit of hindsight, or if they still it was wrong but are clearly acknowledging the consensus that it was wrong and indicating they accept that consensus and wont do it again. Where someone digs their heels in and maintains they were right, not accepting the consensus, then it's not a trouting matter - it's not a situation where humour is the right approach.

5994: 9349: 7180: 6466: 4889: 3779: 2045: 1333: 385: 9487:

may have been on a TP - so if I'm mistaken, you have my apology in advance. I just wanted you to know to what extent he was digging over a few fish articles and in his absurd attempt to prove I had a COI when I created the Racz article. Enjoy what's left of the weekend, and thank you for the many years you've served the community while exercising good judgment, helping to maintain a standard of excellence, harmony and proper behavior in the community.

5923: 4407: 5097: 4627: 3374: 2557: 9322: 7724: 7139: 4858: 2018: 1303: 3249:

to reconsider my decisions - and when I woke up this morning and read all the messages that had been left after I went to bed I did exactly that. That I came to the same conclusion as I did the night before does not indicate a lack of willingness to reconsider, to listen or a lack of understanding of the points made by those disagreeing. It just means that you were not and are not on the side of consensus - it happens to all of us.

9384: 7759: 7207: 6574: 4920: 2096: 1360: 426: 8938: 9260: 7657: 6342: 3663: 2763: 1946: 1265: 304: 88:

wrong, ü → ue or similar is actually commonly used in certain situations). Also check that you've not accidentally included something that matches the pattern but is actually a completely unrelated creation. Once you've generated a list, verified there aren't any false matches and done the research about them then if you still think they should be deleted, asking for assistance from an AWB user is probably the easiest.

9238: 7635: 7041: 6296: 4762: 3609: 1916: 1235: 282: 9299: 7686: 7096: 6409: 4816: 3730: 1983: 343: 2916:, I'm guessing you know it was my attempt at humor; but given that it's been many moons since we chatted, I just wanted to make sure you didn't think I was finding fault. And yes, I fully agree with the "verbose" part. I doubt ANY arb would enjoy reading those walls of text. But hey - if it holds off til January, maybe you'll be back on the committee. It is a chore that you were pretty good at. 9544:

was done in the context of a COIN report I also don't mention the incident involving Beall at all as I was not privy to any private correspondence about that. The final paragraph is only about the number of unique incidents the private information I have relates to - one of them (I can't remember off hand which) was the subject of what appeared at first look to be three independent discussions.

6888: 6938: 6210: 4698: 3471: 1808: 1169: 154: 9230: 7627: 7033: 6288: 4690: 3601: 1908: 1161: 274: 7984: 8267:

be making an exception. There are no doubt many areas of the toolset where you are quite versed and could make all the right exceptions and I would be out of my depth. This was my point here - not to question your general fitness as a sysop but to suggest that in areas where you're not in your core administrative competency, that making exceptions was not the correct move. Best,

4996:(you may remember working on the images for that memorial). I noticed that HJ still isn't around. I know you may be in touch with him. Do you have any news, or should I email him if that would be appropriate? I know what it can be like to be away for a long time, and it can be for various reasons, so I thought I'd check with you first. 8475:

have it (if anyone thinks I don't warrant it, then they're entitled to remove it, per usual process). I am only surprised here that someone can achieve the lofty heights of arb-clerk and not already have it. If PotW spotted this and felt it needing sorting (for some obscure technical minutiae), then

8266:

Of course exceptions are permissible and I would oppose the rewriting you're suggesting must happen if I'm right. Understanding the nuances enough to know when to make an exception is fine. Good even. My contention, is, in this area, you didn't understand that nuance and so weren't the right sysop to

8191:

Are the editors you gave autopatrolled to "prolific creators of clean articles"? No? Then they shouldn't be autopatrolled. Frankly, I don't understand how you don't understand that once you give an editor autopatrolled, that editor's mainspace creations are taken out of the patrol queue, and won't be

8113:

Thryduulf, I apologize in advance but I am coming up short in how to put this gently. As sysops we all have areas of core competency. And then we have a much bigger toolset. As sysops we are entrusted to be careful when we leave core competency and wade into the remainder of the toolset. This is why

6174:

Re your question there: Not of course an arbitrator, but I'd be interested in your analysis. I fear it would be a lot of work. Last night I spent a couple of hours going through 50 consecutive A7s in RHaworth's deletion log from a couple of months back to assess my concordance with his decisions, but

5844: 5818:

Yah, in what was supposed to be a transformative election, we've ended up with pretty much the usual suspects. Not saying that's a bad thing, because they're all competent, but I would have preferred a few more varied voices at the table, and I think Thryduulf is someone who would have provided that.

5784:

Possibly; though I think it was a very crowded field: almost all those who got in are ex-arbs, and/or functionaries, and/or high profile. I think people feel reassured by names they know which are associated with responsible roles. And I suspect tactical voting would have come into play, for you were

3213:

At no point did I say we should throw them out. This specific case has highlighted what looks like a bureaucratic loophole which, if left, may completely disrupt the purpose of IBAN. If we are now classing subsequent edits to the same article as "harassment" and infringement of an IBAN, we should

3169:

can read the consensus there is that the block should have been undone. Moreover the consensus is growing that the block was a bad one in the first instance and that the Arb was too involved. I think if you're keen to keep the spotlight on the poor behaviour of the blocker then that's just fine, we

3135:

It's also worth noting that you can't get a feel for the AN discussion just from reading the bold words as there is no correlation between the word chosen to be bolded and the opinion expressed in the comment. For example those in favour Richie333 being unblocked have used all of "endorse", "support"

3011:

Waggie, I happen to agree with Thryduulf on this and I think it's worth mentioning: Not only was there ~3.5% hours of discussion on WP:AN, but there was also broad consensus across multiple other pages which had been going on for 2-3 days. examples: Ritchie's talk, PMC's talk, etc. Just my 2-cents.

2969:

Hello Thryduulf, I wanted to emphasize my concern about there not being a full community discussion to regarding Ritchie333's AE block before you unblocked. While I believe the block should stand, I can accept community consensus to unblock, but that has definitely not taken place yet. There had only

9543:

Ah ok, I think you have misinterpreted me there. In my evidence statement on the 2020 case I wasn't analysing any of the incidents in any way other than counting how many unique ones involving Jytdog there were and determining which private email(s) related to which incidents. Jytdog's outing of you

9452:

The outing I was referring to in my evidence went beyond my newbie mistake of leaving my email addy. It went further than that - he violated my privacy by digging into my domain registrations, not for Earthwave Society but for my name personally. I think they call that doxxing. He traced my identity

9051:

So are you like the kind of person whose incredulity is set just high enough so that you can go through life without becoming convinced or sure of anything? I don't think you are. But I don't see anything in your response that constitutes a solid reason for declining my appeal. I don't expect you to

8673:

I am not sure what you want me to do, if you want me to amend your sanction, no. You can file an appeal so that we can re-hash your contributions to the topic area, this time with your participation (hopefully), until then no change to the sanction. And, please don't edit old archives, it looks like

8208:

When an admin comes across a situation relating to part of the admin toolset they are not familiar with they have two choices, they can leave it to someone else to deal with or they can investigate to see if it is something they can learn about - either are perfectly acceptable. In this case I chose

8160:

You cannot expect someone unfamiliar with a particular aspect of the admin toolset to infer the exact opposite of what the information page about the relevant tool says, given that reading the information page and following what it says is exactly what we expect admins to do (and exactly what I did)

8139:

the purpose of the right is for it to be given to users who can be trusted to understand and not violate basic core policies when creating article and "Non-article pages", when the people I gave it to are users I trust to understand and not violate basic core policies when creating Non-article pages.

8118:

is not unusual to find at RfA (or wasn't at one point). It seems to me that reading the relevant policy page in an area you don't normally use the sysop toolset and then deciding they met the criteria is one thing. Deciding to wade into an area which, and here's where I am particularly sorry for not

5182:

now, where it says in bold at the top "This is the central log for all sanctions issued to enforce an arbitration decision or as a discretionary sanction." I see that's not the case. Pity — it would certainly be easier to find. And the template you posted on the user's page does say the sanction has

3263:

Forgive me if I don't feel that you addressed my concern about the timespan of the discussion before you unblocked, but I do apologize for assuming that you were not listening or understanding, that was rude of me and comes from frustration regarding your (to my view) hasty actions. However, there's

3248:

Please do not mistake my disagreeing with your arguments for not listening or not understanding. I read the entire discussion at AN, took into consideration the extensive discussion elsewhere as background and concluded that there was a clear and substantial consensus to unblock. I am always willing

3174:

need to examine that. We probably also need to examine the real meaning of IBANs now, as it's pretty clear the community aren't in agreement with the interpretation made by some of the Arbs. Otherwise, I think it's best to just move on in the understanding that Thryduulf interpreted the consensus

1711:

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation's annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well the Wikimedia Foundation supports your work on and off wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not

87:

I don't have any scripts either, so you're asking the wrong person if you want help in that regard. Before you nominate the redirects though, check that they don't actually get used in the real world (I know that in at least one language (maybe Turkish or Hungarian?) we discovered that despite being

9486:

It was in response to a comment you had made with reference to Jytdog's COIN cases in the aggregate. If my memory serves, my impression was that you felt Beall's was the only substantial case out of 7, but perhaps I misinterpreted your point? I can't seem to find that comment to provide a diff - it

8362:

The entire point is that there is nothing in the information page that expresses that that is the spirit of the tool, or that (as others such as NYB have noted) there is any reason why it would be a big deal for I user trust not to violate core policies to be given a right that is, according to the

3882:

Hi Thryduulf, thank you for posting this RD. I feel a little awkward asking this, but if you have a moment, would you be so kind as to click on 'give credit' for it? This is only the third RD I have contributed to, and the first I have nominated myself, so I am a bit excited about it! I expect that

3198:

This is not the place to discuss ibans in general, but in most cases they unambiguously work and we need to be careful not to throw them out when working out how to deal with the ones that don't and to bear in mind that the ultimate goal of everybody here should be to take the course of action that

3150:

I did read the whole discussion, please do not assume that I did not or that I am "confused" - frankly it's a bit condescending for you to suggest so. I do not feel that enough discussion or consensus was built to meet the burden of "... the clear and substantial consensus of uninvolved editors at

9067:

Yes I did read your talk page. It is up to the person appealing a restriction to convince the uninvolved administrators hearing the appeal that the restriction is no longer needed because they understand (a) what they did wrong, (b) why it was wrong, (c) that they wont do the same thing again, and

8971:

and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion

8138:

and come to the conclusion that making a small exception to what are explicitly suggestions and guidelines for typical situations in order to resolve a problem identified by someone who does work in the relevant area would be anything other than uncontroversial. Doubly so when that page identifies

7293:

is planned for March 2020, a contest/editathon to eliminate as many stubs as possible from all 134 counties. Amazon vouchers/book prizes are planned for most articles destubbed from England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland and Northern Ireland and whoever destubs articles from the most counties out of

5353:

DS may cover this, but Slugger O'Toole wasn't formally aware of GamerGate DS. I think the course of action here would be to vacate the original sanction and leave a GamerGate alert for Slugger O'Toole (and perhaps strongly urge Slugger O'Toole not to file administrative reports against Roscelese).

3992:

Finally, I want to apologize if I have caused you to have negative emotions. I know some people don't like my conduct or contributions, but I still believe in the promise of this project. I have tried a number of ways to make the community more open and accepting of diversity through changes large

2468:

But, come to think of it: There don't seem to be any remedies in the Christianity and Sexuality case that authorize this restriction on Slugger O'Toole. It would need to be a discretionary sanction, probably under the gender issues case, and therefore logged at AELOG. And I haven't checked whether

9524:

Did I misunderstand you? I often go back and review the comments made in various cases to confirm that I have read everything in proper context, and that the allegations are supported, verified and corroborated. I also want to make sure that the person under scrutiny is not being treated unjustly

2676:

was a global consultation to define better tools for wiki communication. From February through June 2019, more than 500 volunteers on 20 wikis, across 15 languages and multiple projects, came together with members of the Foundation to create a product direction for a set of discussion tools. The

1437:

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on and off wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly

5226:

to be doing is moving the enforcement actions from individual case pages to the central enforcement log. I just saw this thread and thought maybe I could do that. However, discretionary sanctions doesn't appear to have been authorized in this case, and there were no remedies that applied to this

76:

All pages beginning with "Guee" and about half beginning with "Guei" should be deleted; güe and güi in Spanish indicate that the u is pronounced. You might want to check some similar spellings (such as those beginning with "Aguee", of which there are 2). I don't have any scripts installed, so it

4571:

A trout is an informal and humorous, minor admonishment for someone who has done something wrong when they should and it should be obvious to all parties why. It is not something that should ever be served cold, nor when there are multiple good faith opinions that the action taken wasn't wrong.

3284:

Discussions on individual talk pages have a limited audience, and particularly on a blocked editor's talk page, there's a reticence to add more supporting voices in favour of a block, as people know it's not the designated venue for an appeal to the community and do not wish to pile-on negative

2931:

I wasn't sure about the humour and I was fighting a broken keyboard so not in the best place to pick up on subtelties! I've not made a decision yet about whether I'll stand this year, but if I do I'll be recused from the portals mess as I was moderately involved a few months ago until I allowed

8281:

As I've written on another page, I don't see this as a big deal. The risk that an editor trusted well enough to be an arbitration clerk would publish an unsuitable page into mainspace is slight. The criticism of Thryduulf here strikes me as unwarranted or at best excessive, and I would oppose

2946:

Ahh .. well I didn't realize you'd tried to find a way forward a few months ago. Sorry about the keyboard (and I guess my poor attempt at humor) - hopefully you'll be able to pick up a new one soon. I can't imagine anything but supporting you if you do decide to run. Good to see you again

2996:

The opposition that I saw was primarily to overturning the block, not opposition to unblocking - a point I made clear in my summary. While it was a short discussion at AN (which was the appeal location) there was a clear consensus and that consensus has only grown stronger since the unblock.

5696:

This hot Tom and Jerry is an old-time drink that is once used by one and all in this country to celebrate Christmas with, and in fact it is once so popular that many people think Christmas is invented only to furnish an excuse for hot Tom and Jerry, although of course this is by no means

2493:

Hmm. I haven't got time now to investigate or do anything about this (and likely wont until tomorrow), but if it is just as simple as moving it from Christianity and Sexuality to another case that does have discretionary sanctions then you have my full permission to just do that.

5799:

We'll see. I didn't finally decide to stand this year until about three days before I put my name forward (I waited the few days so I would be available to answer questions), so ask me again a week or so before nominations open if I've not put my foot in it between now and then!

9052:

have blind faith in me, because faith that is blind isn't good. But did you read my talk page? It's not a big deal at this point, but I do understand the reason why the topic ban was imposed, and I have come to terms with that. Anyway, thanks for your input, see you around.

5630:

I have used several of your contributions to ARCA this year, and was pleased during the nominations call to see you going forward. Thanks for volunteering and I hope you were pleased by the support you received. Things could be worse – you could have been given a seat!

8565:

As a regular patroller, I think what Thryduulf has done is reasonable . I'd have no difficulty with giving any reasonably trusted user the right for a special purpose. The right is really just a convenience so we can concentrate the patrolling where it's needed most.

445:. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the 9505:

Thank you for your kind words, but I don't recall making a comment about whether any of the COIN cases were substantial? Either I'm getting forgetful in my old age or you're misremembering someone else's comment as mine? Both seem about equally plausible to me!

8249:

meaning of the information page, and I'm not saying my actions were right. What I am saying is that my actions were consistent with the explicit wording of the information page when read by someone who is not familiar with what it is apparently intended to say.

3313:

Allowing for editors around the world to object (or not object) to the block would make it clear that the follow up action had support from the global Knowledge community. For better or worse, the whole community likes to know their opinions will be considered.

8119:

being able to be more gentle, it's clear you don't understand the mechanisms at play and deciding to make an exception is a whole different matter. You're right that Autopatrol could use some tweaking. But so could your approach in situations like these. Best,

8151:

granting the right is very much a big deal (don't say it can be given to a user when an admin trusts their work, say it can be given only when an admin who regularly patrols new articles, templates and files trusts a user to create new articles, templates and

4293:

Hi there. I'm taking it upon myself to try to moderate a discussion among Portal power users with the intention of creating a draft guideline for Portals, and I'd like to invite you to join this discussion. If you're interested, please join the discussion at

3285:

criticism. It's a moot point now for this situation, but for future, as per standard practice at the administrator's noticeboard, it would be helpful to allow at least 24 hours for editors around the world to take notice and have the chance to weigh in.

6485:. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being 8517:

to make the clerk's jobs easier. Whether it does anything to make a patrollers job easier is itself debatable. But that's what should be driving grants of autopatrol (or not) and that piece, at least, is clear on the current information page. Best,

3842: 6432: 8217:

describes its purpose as being to ensure that the contributions of users who can be trusted not to violate core policies are separated from those who cannot be so trusted (or who we don't know whether they can be trusted or not trusted). It

4936: 3045:

at which (as I mentioned in my initial post here), there was considerable opposition to unblocking - from the blocking administrator and from other parties. So, if we're taking into account the other discussions, then there was certainly

8651:

not me - I could not reopen the request without discussion with them first anyway - not that I have any interest in doing so given the aggressive tone of your message that attacks other editors rather than addressing the issues at hand.

71: 8382:

Sigh. Once again, nonsense and bureaucracy abound. And once again the issue revolves around trust. If Thryduulf trusts Cthomas3 to have auto-patrolled rights, then that should be enough. (or any Admin A granting User B the right) ...

8820: 8540:

Then take that up with PotW, who said that a clerk without autopatrolled was going to be either at a disadvantage, or would cause pointless effort for those following in their wake. Not Thryduulf, who quite reasonably issued it. Now

6726: 5485: 4932: 4145: 3855: 3844: 2081: 1664: 8226:

about when it is appropriate for someone doing article work - with the only caveat being for "very new users". There is no mention anywhere on that page that patrolling project space pages is irrelevant (if it did I presume that

1581: 4255: 2851:: The team is thinking about the first set of proposed changes. The team will be working with a few communities to pilot those changes. The best way to stay informed is by adding your username to the list on the project page: 4163: 642: 9098:

You can check redirects with the Preview button before saving them. If you have created a working redirect, the preview will show the name of the target page alongside a bent arrow (or "Redirect to:" label in text mode). —

8245:(after edit conflict) yes it is the first time I've given someone the autopatrolled right. I did it right after reading the information page about it, so while I evidently do not know better than you or barkeep about the 5701:

No matter what concoction is your favorite to imbibe during this festive season I would like to toast you with it and to thank you for all your work here at the 'pedia this past year. Best wishes for your 2020 as well T.

2820: 7873:? I wasn't feeling entirely motivated to read how the image deletion page works, but I do know that this picture is in fact a copyrighted picture and the uploader lied about it being his own work. The image was shot by 7124: 3768: 4538:

would not be appropriate now post-close when you'd previously suggested re-opening and trouting the deleting admin? Is it because the severity of the deletion has gone beyond mere humourous admonishment by trouting?

2824: 2875:: The Editing team hopes to share results in November. This study asks whether the project helped editors add links and citations. The best way to stay informed is by adding the project page to your watchlist: 8360:"I did it because nothing explicitly said I couldn't" while pretending that a tool that in spirit is clearly intended to reduce new page patrollers' workloads is somehow essential to backroom pages such as these. 3136:

and "oppose" while those same words have been used by those with different opinions. It's especially confusing as at least one person bolded a single word in a comment supporting both the block and the appeal.

7115:

are now enabled on the English Knowledge. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at

6879: 8903: 8387:

we're suggesting that we the community no longer trust Thryduulf (or any other Admin) with the ability to check the auto-patrolled box. Nonsense in a box IMO. Support Thryduulf continuing to being an admin.

7713: 5227:

editor (nor were they a party), so I'm questioning the validity of this sanction. Is there a different DS topic area that this should be logged under instead? Or is this a regular administrative action? –

7197:

that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration

3110:@Waggie: we argued already for days, - 3.5 hours was only that particular venue. A block that takes away the article editing time of not only the blocked, but also of the commenters, is not a good block, 1345: 846: 5195:. As to why I e-mailed you, that was my unfortunate Bishzilla-type tact: I thought you might have forgotten to log it, and didn't want to say so in public. I was remembering how little I liked getting 4434:. 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 3328:

In normal circumstances, yes I'd have left it for longer at AN, but editors from all over the world had been expressing their opinion in multiple locations for multiple days prior to the AN thread.

2651:

Is it a story about how someone helped you to learn something new? Is it a story about how someone helped you get involved in a group? Something else? Whatever your story is, we want to hear it!

9525:

because of something I may have said or done. Some have interpreted that part of my personality as being unable to DROPTHESTICK when that isn't the case at all. My mind simply needs assurances. 😊

7112: 6425: 470:

Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights

2416: 731: 5491: 3420: 1677: 1666: 5729: 4993: 4246: 4151: 8148:

the right is irrelevant to the project namespace (don't say "articles and other pages", instead say "articles, templates and files" or whatever is actually relevant - it isn't stated anywhere)

8327: 2608: 1527: 6690: 806: 6428:

should be enabled on the English Knowledge. If enabled, this functionality would allow administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces, rather than the entire site.

81: 5755:

I've just seen the results. Shame. I always valued your input: intelligent, knowledgeable, balanced, fair, and insightful. It was, though, a very crowded field this year. Try again next.

4073: 3870: 1692: 648: 9472:

Assuming you're talking about Jytdog, if you haven't already, you should be posting this for the arbitrators to see rather than me - the workshop is over now so I've done all I can do.

8921: 1372: 8412:

you reading the entire discussion(s) and realizing that since broader issues are also at play, it is unhelpful to personalize them further. Many thanks. Nor is it helpful to distract.

6482: 8778: 6702: 5461: 5455: 4905: 4450: 3875: 3791: 2008:

an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories

7406: 7388: 5503: 4109: 2257: 7698: 7154: 8772: 5437: 5188: 5184: 4420: 4169: 3919: 2299: 2293: 2239: 1545: 8621:

foreign leader by his or her foreign language title, there's no reason to insist that Gaelic terms be used for the English language terms that accurately describe the position.

1315: 9746: 8832: 8826: 8627:

Finally, I don't know where that guy got off threatening me with a "block." I've almost certainly been an editor longer than he has and I'll put my record up against anyone's.

7376: 7358: 6915: 6738: 6732: 6478: 5977: 5497: 4097: 4061: 3697: 3693: 3689: 3685: 3681: 3677: 3645: 3635: 3631: 3627: 3623: 2245: 784: 636: 7928:

parameter with an Instagram URL that is more specific, since the Paul Moseley link above leads to an album of many photos, amongst which I couldn't find the one in question. --

8808: 8760: 8748: 7489: 6684: 5443: 5302:

and anyone else. I'm not in the right headspace at the moment to think about this, but it needs sorting. You have my full permission to revoke and/or modify this as required.

4283: 4175: 4157: 4103: 4067: 2517: 2287: 2269: 2251: 1539: 446: 103: 9624:

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at

8080: 8073: 8015:

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at

7497:

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at

6140:

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at

4592:

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at

855: 9728: 9710: 8796: 8790: 8784: 8766: 8754: 8155:

nobody who doesn't understand the right intimately should be doing anything with it. (Explicitly say this, rather than as current wording that strongly implies the opposite)

7364: 6832: 6714: 6708: 6696: 5473: 5467: 5449: 4085: 4079: 2263: 1593: 1587: 5596:

Tough luck on missing out on getting to elected to ArbCom, even though you had more votes than three of the winners. Best wishes for the holiday season and the New Year.

9788: 9782: 9716: 7418: 7400: 7394: 7370: 4139: 4121: 4115: 4091: 3448: 1868: 1533: 588: 576: 7736: 3892: 9734: 9616: 9373: 7403:: FindingGLAMs Challenge; Art by Edvard Munch from the Thiel Gallery; More European archives on Wikidata; OpenGLAM now! – watch the presentations; Knowledge in Libraries 7382: 6497: 2281: 1575: 1557: 1551: 1417: 1014:

So what is the correct way to preemptively ensure that links aren't broken if the section header changes? That's what I understood the point of the anchor template was?

867: 759: 660: 654: 9334: 7671: 7649: 7278: 4981: 4254:

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate

3836: 834: 9776: 9758: 9752: 9740: 9722: 8814: 8597:

I mostly use the mobile app these days. I expected to receive any notifications about this via that. I would have responded in a timely manner if I'd gotten them.

6720: 6627: 5479: 2913: 2275: 2155: 2149: 1854: 1850: 594: 582: 570: 397: 7596: 7588: 6276: 6272: 4754: 4750: 4746: 4742: 4738: 4734: 4726: 513: 9441: 8802: 8781:: Students write articles about Media artists, Public Domain Day 2020, Wiki Goes Caribbean, WikiFridays at Ihlia - Wikimedia Nederland in January & February 2020 7858: 7527: 7412: 7024: 7020: 7016: 7012: 7004: 7000: 6996: 6992: 6984: 4133: 3567: 3541: 3537: 624: 612: 606: 442: 7592: 6988: 2741: 1227: 1223: 1215: 9177: 9173: 9169: 8495:- This is a trivial right, and if it makes the clerk's and patrollers' jobs easier, then I see no reason to deny it, other than for bureaucracy's sake, of course. 7510: 7502: 6443: 4828: 4127: 3757: 1757: 1569: 600: 9654: 8175:

I would expect someone unfamiliar with a particular aspect of the admin toolset to not use that particular aspect of the admin toolset, and certainly not to make

7008: 6851: 236: 232: 228: 224: 216: 9770: 9221: 7170:

When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title.

3795: 2545: 2305: 1563: 1349: 851: 131: 5725: 4476: 2681:

of the Talk Page Consultation was published in August. It summarizes the product direction the team has started to work on, which you can read more about here:

2272:: Open cultural heritage; More libraries in Africa on Wikidata; Global MIL Week 2019 Feature Conference; Kulturhistoria som gymnasiearbete; Wiki Loves Monuments 9764: 8838: 7783: 6744: 5509: 4485: 4364: 630: 7081: 6903: 3985: 2863:: The Editing team plans to post results before the end of the calendar year. The best way to stay informed is by adding the project page to your watchlist: 1896: 1149: 262: 9637: 9629: 9396: 7952:

I am not an administrator on Commons so I cannot help you further than Redrose64 already has. If you do need more assistance then the place to ask is at the

7424: 6840: 6833: 6153: 6145: 5057: 4181: 3299:

Obviously it didn't get to you that it was a block not justified by the action, rather objectively. Bad enough that a user had to suffer that for so long. --

2183: 872: 618: 318: 6920: 6843:, as the workshop phase is now currently closed and no further edits should be made to the page. The talk page remains open of you need to discuss further. 4678: 3453: 2842: 5950: 5345:

Hi all. I remember coming across this earlier in the year but was very busy with a few other projects. Looking at this again, it seems to me that: (a) the

4843: 4605: 4597: 3433: 3422: 1785: 1599: 461: 6192: 1995: 1790: 9794: 8024: 8020: 7787: 4513: 4392: 3511: 2664:

The team would value your examples. These examples will help everyone develop a shared understanding of what this project should support and encourage.

839: 744: 733: 9040: 9005: 8613:(Federal Chancellor). No one is English refers to her thusly. We use the word we already have: chancellor. The French prime minister's real title is 8476:

the obvious, right and useful thing to do was to grant it and get on with our day. Anything else past this is nonsense and a waste of everyone's time.

5085: 4776: 900: 136: 6455: 666: 9113: 7532: 3507: 3225: 3208: 8926: 6815: 6186: 3742: 3123: 819: 808: 370: 55: 8453: 8432: 7618: 7578: 7302: 2073: 2037:

for Administrators were put in place last year. Knowledge should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.

9061: 9034: 8444:

Support you not making assumptions - but here we are. If this isn't about the two people at hand, then this is the wrong place for the discussion.

7799: 7791: 3186: 2828: 1836: 1752: 1219: 186: 8554: 8004: 3907: 3145: 9418: 8291: 7965: 7940: 7835: 7795: 7775: 7498: 7490: 7290: 7255: 6604: 6439: 5944: 5033: 5019: 4958: 4831:

was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new

4345:(which is where it is transcluded from) and take a look at the code, copying what you need. If it isn't working as it should then someone at the 4295: 3813: 3519: 3037: 2697: 2126: 1394: 1141: 1113: 490: 366: 240: 220: 7739:, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is 6974: 5047: 4002: 3946: 2775:

In September, the Editing team updated the mobile visual editor's editing toolbar. Anyone could see these changes in the mobile visual editor.

2678: 9217: 9068:(d) they are listening and responding to advice from others so that they wont cause other problems going forward. Your appeal did not do that. 8315: 8276: 8170: 8087: 6873: 5660: 5333: 3323: 3308: 3294: 2503: 2481: 2463: 2449: 2320: 1968: 1938: 1201: 1051: 1023: 198: 8259: 8240: 8196: 8035: 6435:

asks whether admins who don't use their tools for a significant period of time (e.g. five years) should have the toolset procedurally removed.

6246: 5888: 5809: 5794: 5779: 5625: 5207: 5173: 4808: 2766:

The editing toolbar is changing in the mobile visual editor. The old system had two different toolbars. Now, all the buttons are together.

97: 9423: 9274: 9252: 9149: 9077: 8968: 8945: 8931: 8853: 8661: 8485: 8341: 8183:

not to double-down when multiple editors, fellow admin, and arbs, have expressed disagreement with the exception made. The first sentence of

8023:. Please add your evidence by March 23, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, 7840: 7574: 7284: 7260: 7108: 6759: 6609: 6451: 6421: 5524: 4963: 4712: 3876: 3818: 3711: 3489: 3361: 3315: 3286: 2365: 2131: 1399: 1295: 1291: 1287: 1283: 1257: 1253: 495: 9365: 9338: 8898: 7059: 7055: 6804: 6384: 6380: 6376: 6372: 6368: 6364: 6360: 6356: 6334: 6330: 6326: 6322: 6318: 6314: 6310: 5828: 5569: 4941:

will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive

4581: 4358: 4319:

I like your box on barnstars, above on this page. could you please tell me how one would set that up? I really appreciate any help. thanks!

3337: 3273: 3258: 3160: 3006: 1205: 202: 9749:: Nationaal Museum van Wereldculturen contributes to Wikimedia Commons again; Student research on GLAM-Wiki at Erasmus University Rotterdam 9625: 9617: 9553: 9538: 9515: 9500: 9481: 9284: 7564: 7484: 7439: 7192: 6394: 6224: 6141: 5311: 5278: 5005: 4786: 4241: 4196: 3497: 2030: 1960: 1930: 1832: 194: 8527: 8397: 6264: 5243: 2956: 2941: 2864: 2428: 1659: 1279: 1249: 1008: 206: 9854: 8577: 7779: 7294:

the 134. Sign up on page if interested in participating, hope this will prove to be good fun and productive, we have over 44,000 stubs!♦

6956: 6228: 5646: 5380: 5297: 4593: 2832: 1964: 1934: 1840: 1697: 1614: 1471: 8691: 6250: 6242: 3707: 3655: 3563: 1858: 726: 190: 9809: 9641: 9413: 8016: 7830: 7514: 7250: 6964: 6599: 6157: 5732:

to which you were a major contributor. I'd like to take the draft to RfC and propose it becomes a project wide guideline or policy per

5264: 5192: 5179: 4953: 4730: 4609: 4397: 4309: 3965:

Then when I asked you to change it to reflect the pronouns on my own page, in every article that covers me, and in the quote you used:

3808: 3485: 3264:

nothing constructive to be gained for anyone by arguing further. Best wishes and I hope that we can interact more agreeably in future.

3175:

correctly. More than 12 hours later and nothing has changed, except perhaps the strength of feeling against the block has increased.

3059: 3021: 2530: 2519: 2188: 2121: 1822: 1389: 1187: 485: 116: 105: 9159: 6168: 5745: 4266: 2756: 1091: 8976:. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the 8697: 8647:

If you wish to appeal your AE sanction you need discuss things with the administrator who imposed the sanction, in this case that is

8508: 8420: 8062: 6952: 6633: 6268: 6232: 5386: 4716: 3533: 3523: 681: 176: 168: 4124:: Nordic Museum publications on Wikidata and Commons; Knowledge training in Härnösand; Open cultural heritage data in focus in Visby 2836: 1735: 916:

is redundant? The anchor already exists, it's autogenerated by the section heading. If you look at the emitted HTML, in between the

801: 9400: 9399:

of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The

8912:

in the first place, so I am asking that you read the argument and edit your side of the debate to mention the additional argument.

8617:

Again, this position is almost never described in English thusly. Similarly, unless it's going to be policy that we must refer to

8591:

First - please refer to me as "he". Using the third person plural pronoun for an individual is not only ungrammatical, it's rude!

8142:

If this is as incorrect as you seem to be indicating, then the information page needs a fundamental rewrite to make it clear that:

7307: 4672: 4010: 3968:

4. you used strikethrough and commented on it rather than simply making the change without strikethrough as you had done at step 3.

2902: 2737: 2730: 2064: 9843: 8887: 7886: 7473: 6793: 6120:, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! 6020:, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! 5558: 4328: 4230: 3105: 2688:

The team needs and wants your help at this early stage. They are starting to develop the first idea. Please add your name to the

2614: 2354: 1648: 715: 9145: 8376: 8128: 7157:. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: 4565: 3493: 3352:

Just to note that I did see the ping from Thryduulf's talk. TY for the use of your page. I don't have anything further to add.

2802:

Feedback: You can try the refreshed toolbar by opening the mobile VisualEditor on a smartphone. Please post your feedback on the

2213: 1476: 328: 296: 172: 5868: 3715: 3589: 3515: 3415: 1325:

two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.

66: 9659: 8957: 8927: 8722: 8103: 6658: 6260: 5733: 5411: 2747:

Feedback: You can try the new Edit Cards by opening the mobile visual editor on a smartphone. Please post your feedback on the

2168: 2157: 1183: 438: 8134:

I'm sorry I seem to have upset you over this, but I genuinely do not understand how anyone could read the information page at

8108: 4620: 2603: 460:, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing 9521: 9118: 8913: 7537: 7332: 6960: 6925: 6197: 4987: 4683: 4035: 3458: 3012:

Apologies for butting in Thryduulf, but I thought it was a point worth mentioning. (and TY for your efforts in this matter)

2667: 1795: 1191: 1154: 905: 519: 141: 5018:

HJ is alive and well, just busy with his offline life. Emailing him will not be a problem if you want to get back in touch.

2983: 2876: 2714: 2376: 9437: 8641: 7854: 7274: 6623: 5719: 5607: 4977: 4472: 3832: 2810: 2781:

All of the editing tools are located in one toolbar. Previously, the toolbar changed when you clicked on different things.

2145: 2108: 1770: 1759: 1501: 1413: 863: 509: 5959: 3931: 3068: 9684: 8799:: Historic photos; Support for international Wikimedia community; Library training tour; Many GLAMs improved on Wikidata 8031: 6827: 6076: 4273: 9311: 5066: 4498: 4494: 4487: 4377: 4373: 4366: 3984:

I hope you take my answer as an opportunity to reflect on why you made those choices. Here's a nice set of guidelines:

3851: 3429: 2526: 2164: 1766: 1673: 881: 815: 740: 544: 112: 6881: 5164:'s precedent. I'm also curious why you felt this needed to be addressed by email rather than on my talk page message. 9822: 9818: 9028: 8999: 8866: 8862: 8010: 7452: 7448: 6895: 6772: 6768: 6135: 5537: 5533: 5196: 5142: 5070: 5059: 4288: 4209: 4205: 2333: 2329: 1627: 1623: 1423: 1135: 1085: 885: 874: 694: 690: 355: 9611: 9466: 8545:, you've given no reason to question it being handed out, even if it's just a long-service, not-arrested-yet badge. 4349:

is more likely to be able to provide useful assistance than I can (and likely get it working better than mine is!).

44: 9376:

and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.

9108: 5736:. I'm asking for your permission to do this and for any ideas you may have to help the process along. Thank you, - 5710: 4314: 8145:

exceptions are never permissible (use words like "always"/"never" and "requirement" not "typical" and "suggested"_

5764: 2898: 2673: 9761:: FindingGLAMs; Knowledge in libraries; Art from the Thiel Gallery Collections; Kulturhistoria som gymnasiearbete 9588: 9433: 7850: 7270: 6619: 4973: 4874: 4587: 4518: 4468: 3828: 3114:

said that well. - @Thryduulf: thanks from project quality article improvement, aka the cabal of the outcast ;) --

2643: 2599: 2141: 1409: 1059: 859: 505: 4269:

to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

2707: 912: 5859:

You're one of my favourite Wikipedians. Be good to meet up again. Be well. Keep well. Have a lovely Christmas.

2852: 2689: 3798:. The self-nomination period will close November 12, with voting running from November 19 through December 2. 2405: 8427: 7870: 1720: 1446: 7747:

a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your

3981:. It's the kind of thing that has a cumulative effect when trying to collaborate as a minority on Knowledge. 3883:

I'd feel differently about the 10th or 20th, but I would appreciate having this on my talk page :-) Cheers,

7771: 7219: 5933: 5834: 4870: 4560: 4443: 2925: 2724:

What happens when you click on a link. The new Edit Card is bigger and has more options for editing links.

764: 8811:: Winning photos Wiki Loves Monuments shown in different cities; Libraries Lead an All-Ukrainian Challenge 6053:

Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.

5038:

Gah, too many tildes! I've pinged HJ on Facebook as well so with any luck he'll pop in again when he can.

2890: 2290:: Help the Movement Learn about Content Campaigns & Supporting newcomers in Wikidata training courses! 9092:, but didn't do it correctly. I've fixed it now. For future reference, the correct redirect syntax is: 7976: 7894: 7864: 7716:

confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

6116:

and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a

5677: 5217: 4909: 4455: 2835:

in the mobile visual editor with contributors. You can read more about what the team did and learned in

5964: 5482:: A busy conference season, a new Caribbean community and introducing a tool for adding artwork metadata 2618: 1072:

would be the place to ask. I'm going to play around with it but I don't know anything about timelines.—

1065: 9089: 8973: 8686: 8067: 7223: 6447: 6016:

and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user

5687: 5376: 5107: 4637: 3384: 3220: 3181: 3032: 2964: 2595: 2567: 2401: 5914: 3367: 2803: 2767: 2748: 2703: 2658: 8917: 7953: 6181: 6005: 5115: 4877:, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. ( 4645: 3392: 2575: 1742:

if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

1728: 1461:

if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

1451: 9836: 8948:

requesting that it be speedily deleted from Knowledge. This has been done for the following reason:

8880: 7466: 6786: 5879:

Thank you, and yes meeting up again would indeed be good. Merry Christmas to you and yours as well.

5551: 4223: 2347: 1641: 708: 474:

at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

9805: 9675: 8849: 8713: 8674:

you had already replied and the admins are crazy people for not noticing your participation. Best,

8583: 8439: 8413: 8353: 7435: 7323: 7117: 6755: 6649: 6106: 5520: 5402: 5105:

It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can

4635:

It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can

4192: 4026: 3382:

It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can

2702:

The Editing team is trying to make it simpler to edit on mobile devices. The team is changing the

2565:

It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can

2316: 2204: 1610: 1492: 677: 535: 359: 49: 7806: 2629: 1554:: Women in Red: collaboration with The National Library in Norway and Oslo Metropolitan University 993: 9628:. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at 9608: 9535: 9497: 9463: 8184: 8135: 8019:. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at 7501:. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at 6144:. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at 6026: 5574: 4596:. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at 2894: 854:

and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. You are receiving this message because you

471: 7814: 6487:

the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted

3989:

And thanks for pointing me to the banning policy. I had never read it! That is quite a document.

1318:

via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.

8550: 8481: 7802:. There are a total of seven editors that have been appointed as stewards, the most since 2014. 5894: 4106:: Knowledge Penang Meetup 2 @ Tuanku Fauziah Museum and Gallery, University of Science Malaysia 3888: 3304: 3119: 3101: 1321:

The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes)

797: 62: 2682: 2633: 9549: 9511: 9477: 9073: 9022: 9012: 8993: 8657: 8372: 8287: 8255: 8236: 8166: 7961: 7918: 7882: 6869: 6809: 6073: 6059: 5884: 5805: 5775: 5691: 5656: 5621: 5329: 5307: 5274: 5169: 5043: 4836: 4577: 4431: 4354: 3942: 3903: 3333: 3254: 3215: 3204: 3193: 3176: 3141: 3027: 3002: 2937: 2499: 2459: 2424: 1376: 1129: 1109: 1079: 1032: 1019: 415: 93: 9270: 9155: 8328:

Knowledge talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Granting autopatrolled rights to arb clerks

7667: 7645: 7614: 7570: 6970: 6864:

Sorry I missed your closure notice as I was viewing SmokeyJoe's contributions diff-by-diff.

6238: 4804: 4772: 3641: 3585: 3503: 2816: 1828: 1450:

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

1197: 615:: More bibliographic data on Wikidata; National Library of Sweden; GLAM activities Wikimania 314: 182: 9280: 9248: 9165: 7999: 7584: 7077: 7051: 6980: 6390: 6256: 6176: 6001: 5029: 5001: 4782: 4722: 4442:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 4342: 4304: 3998: 3974: 3927: 3913: 3898:

Sorry, I never think to do that (I don't care about those messages so I forget others do).

3703: 3651: 3559: 3529: 2706:. If you have something to say about editing on a mobile device, please leave a message at 2694:

section of the project page, if you would like to hear about opportunities to participate.

2034: 1956: 1926: 1892: 1846: 1275: 1245: 1211: 850:

is now open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the

457: 374: 324: 292: 258: 212: 9183: 8027:. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Knowledge:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. 7222:

will begin on 08 February 2020, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2020, 13:59 (UTC). The

1864: 8: 9447: 9083: 8523: 8272: 8209:

the second option and chose to read the information page about it. That information page

8124: 8099: 7936: 5707: 4847: 4346: 3957:

2. then used a mix of pronouns in your own writing, some of which matched the quoted text

2886: 2107:

The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and

1047: 1004: 38: 17: 4112:: Share Your Data master classes for GLAMs; New project manager WMNL; Images from Africa 72:

I want to nominate some more Eubot redirects for deletion, but it would be too much work

8775:: Proposing collaboration with museums in Bali; First Wikisource training in the region 8228: 8058: 7161: 6113: 6097: 6090: 6013: 5864: 5790: 5760: 5602: 5204: 5139: 4669: 4602:

Please add your evidence by December 20, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes.

3951:

Hi! Just saw this. To answer your question above, here's how your conduct looks to me:

3411: 3236: 3130: 2057: 1348:

is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the

465: 9213: 9141: 8978: 8222:

states that administrators are able to grant the right to users they trust, and gives

7810: 7560: 6948: 6352: 6306: 6220: 6150:

Please add your evidence by January 14, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes.

5690:

is a fun read if you have the time. Right from the start it extols the virtues of the

5223: 4708: 3960:

3. then switched all of yours so they did not match the quoted text "for consistency."

3673: 3619: 3481: 1818: 1542:: Digitization of banknotes and introduction to structured data on Commons (continued) 1179: 164: 9361: 9057: 8637: 8546: 8477: 8336: 8310: 7748: 6823: 6175:

I'm having trouble organising the data tonight and my computer keeps crashing on me.

6034: 5824: 5090: 5081: 4901: 4509: 4414: 4388: 4280: 3884: 3866: 3746: 3444: 3300: 3115: 3097: 2971: 2541: 2179: 1781: 1749: 1688: 1468: 896: 830: 793: 755: 404: 127: 58: 9634:

Please add your evidence by April 21, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes.

7507:

Please add your evidence by March 13, 2020, which is when the evidence phase closes.

7129:

wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input

7066: 5770:

Thank you. I suspect the "balanced and fair" lost me a few votes from the WO crowd.

4793: 3858:

Knowledge:Requests for comment/2019 community sentiment on binding desysop procedure

3845:

Knowledge:Requests for comment/2019 community sentiment on binding desysop procedure

3574: 1881: 247: 9645: 9016: 8987: 8364: 8301: 8297: 8283: 7970: 7947: 7901: 7878: 7518: 7295: 6911: 6070: 6056: 5741: 5370: 4904:

is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review

4552: 4462: 4427: 4324: 3319: 3290: 3269: 3156: 3076: 3055: 2979: 2713: 2417:

Knowledge:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Christianity and Sexuality#Individual sanctions

2395: 1123: 1099: 1073: 9851: 9314:

request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

8895: 7481: 6801: 5566: 5024:

Thanks, that is good to know. (PS. You didn't sign properly so no ping got sent.)

4878: 4238: 3937:

How on earth is referring to someone using gender neutral pronouns misgendering!?

2794: 2720: 2362: 2060:

has begun. The community consultation period will take place October 4th to 10th.

1656: 1375:

is in progress regarding whether a user group should be created that could modify

1322: 723: 9602: 9529: 9491: 9457: 7994: 6586: 5640: 5259: 5238: 5199:, for my own part, though I hope I wouldn't in any case have been quite so rude. 5025: 5013: 4997: 4535: 4299: 3994: 3923: 3050:

consensus for such a rapid unblock once the appeal was heard at AN. Best wishes.

411: 26: 9847: 8972:

tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with

8891: 8835:: New Team Leadership, GLAM-Focused Grants Review, OpenGLAM Declaration Research 8466:

I can only echo Ched's, "Sigh. Once again, nonsense and bureaucracy abound." 8-(

7477: 6797: 5562: 4234: 2358: 1652: 776: 719: 9545: 9507: 9473: 9104: 9069: 8983: 8680: 8653: 8519: 8504: 8449: 8393: 8368: 8349: 8268: 8251: 8232: 8162: 8120: 8095: 7957: 7929: 7874: 6865: 6859: 6845: 6162: 6126: 6017: 6009: 5880: 5801: 5771: 5750: 5703: 5668: 5652: 5617: 5325: 5303: 5293: 5270: 5165: 5161: 5039: 4573: 4524: 4439: 4350: 4259: 3978: 3938: 3899: 3357: 3329: 3250: 3200: 3137: 3017: 2998: 2952: 2933: 2921: 2495: 2488: 2472: 2469:

the awareness requirements for a discretionary sanctions are met in this case.

2455: 2440: 2420: 2412: 2370: 2085: 1105: 1040: 1015: 997: 89: 34: 27: 8189:

Autopatrolled is a user right given to prolific creators of clean articles ...

8041:

The secondary mailing list is in use for this case: arbcom-en-b@wikimedia.org

7127:

seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with

6717:: Swedish Performing Arts Agency; Bibliographic data about Swedish periodicals 5907: 5900: 5583: 5222:

Forgive me for sticking my nose in here, but one of the things the clerks are

2078:

focus on how harassment and private complaints should be handled in the future

8573: 8203: 8193: 8045: 6040: 5860: 5786: 5756: 5597: 5289: 5200: 5151: 5135: 4832: 4665: 4618: 4531: 4435: 3085: 2755: 2550: 1999: 1069: 639:: Visualising the status and the spread of a cultural collection in Knowledge 453: 78: 6898:

and other Metro pages. Since you had some involvement with pages related to

3993:

and small, and that sometimes leads to tension. It is not personal, though!

9053: 8668: 8633: 8331: 8305: 7234: 7150: 6819: 5820: 5683: 5125: 5077: 4655: 4505: 4384: 3862: 3440: 3402: 3111: 2585: 2537: 2375:

Hey Thryduulf. On mobile right now so can't fix it myself, but did you log

2175: 1777: 1684: 1036: 892: 826: 751: 609:: Sámi place names – collaboration with the Sámi Várdobáiki Language Center 123: 9130: 8116:

How would you use your admin tools in a scenario you were unfamiliar with?

7549: 6723:: White Elephant; WikiWednesday Salon; Cascadia Wikimedians annual meeting 6500:, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: 6083: 5987: 4839:

are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.

4148:: Getting started, Tool highlights, Blog posts and presentations about SDC 2787:

The buttons for moving forward and backward in the edit flow have changed.

9743:: WoALUG and NGO Germin call Albanian Diaspora to contribute to Knowledge 9731:: Volunteers' meet-up; Wiki Cinta Budaya 2020 structured data edit-a-thon 8623:

To insist otherwise is the most absurd sort of pettifoggery and pedantry.

7911: 6907: 5737: 4545: 4336: 4320: 4276:. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic. 3265: 3243: 3152: 3051: 2991: 2975: 2907: 7227: 5993: 5349:

case doesn't provide authority to sanction Slugger O'Toole, and (b) the

5183:

been logged in the central log: "This sanction has been recorded in the

4835:

is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally,

4446:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

2762: 2625: 2437:

Thanks for the ping. I think you forgot your signature on the log page.

9599: 9526: 9488: 9454: 9202: 7907: 7603: 5730:

Knowledge:WikiProject Aviation/Aircraft accidents and incidents/Factors

5285: 5249: 5228: 4424:

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

3548: 2740:

on the Edit Card for adding and modifying links. There is also a new,

2637: 1035:

warns against it, and I've not come across pre-emptive anchors before.

9048:"I've seen nothing..." "I am not convinced..." "I'm not even sure..." 8963:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may

8904:

I added an argument for Floof that I forgot to add when I nominated it

6894:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the requested move of

5922: 5458:: IHLIA starts monthly Knowledge writing sessions, Wiki Techstorm 2019 456:

is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at

9348: 9100: 8676: 8648: 8500: 8445: 8404: 8389: 7226:

of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically

7179: 6814:

FYI. You might not have intended to respond in the "parties" section

6465: 6117: 6109: 5938: 5843: 5364: 5356: 5319: 4888: 4406: 3778: 3771:

is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.

3353: 3042: 3013: 2948: 2917: 2656:

Please share a link to a memorable discussion, or describe it on the

2389: 2381: 2044: 1332: 441:

on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to

384: 5269:

Sorry, yeah, I'm still thinking about what the best way forward is.

8787:: Knowledge editing workshop with the Norwegian Network for Museums 8568: 5633: 4613: 2415:'s lead with the blocks of Roscelese I logged it on the case page. 8213:

states that it applies to both articles and non-article pages. It

1680:

Talk:List of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft

1667:

Talk:List of accidents and incidents involving commercial aircraft

858:

as a user who would like to be notified when the 2019 RfC begins.

9383: 9321: 9259: 9237: 7758: 7723: 7656: 7634: 7206: 7138: 7040: 6573: 6341: 6295: 4919: 4857: 4761: 3662: 3608: 2095: 2017: 1945: 1915: 1456: 1359: 1302: 1264: 1234: 425: 303: 281: 8960:, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time. 5189:

Knowledge:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions/Log/2019

5178:

Oh. I thought all arb enforcement sanctions went in the central

4869:

Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via

4459:. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add 4172:: Community Wishlist Survey 2020 and Wiki Advanced Training 2019 1438:

affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

1314:

Editors using the mobile website on Knowledge can opt-in to new

8513:

It might be a tempest in a teakettle. However, autopatrol does

6556: 5651:

Thank you. I do plan to stick around and pitch in where I can!

5452:: Wikimedia training workshops; Conference in the city of Arles 4449:

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review

4247:

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process

3918:

Hi! I'd like you to update your comment to reflect my pronouns

2733:. Anyone could use the new version in the mobile visual editor. 1739: 1458: 9403:

is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.

9298: 7685: 7095: 6887: 6408: 4850:

has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.

4815: 3729: 2742:

combined workflow for editing a link's display text and target

2609:

Editing News #2 – Mobile editing and talk pages – October 2019

2082:

community consultation on partial and temporary office actions

1982: 342: 9364:

of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee

8909: 7171: 5785:

a contender. Anyway, I think you should try again next year.

5470:: Transgressing the boundaries of internal academic discourse 9713:: Know My Name; Public libraries of Queensland join Wikidata 9229: 8090:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

7626: 7032: 6937: 6532: 6287: 6209: 5102:

Hello, Thryduulf. Please check your email; you've got mail!

4697: 4689: 4632:

Hello, Thryduulf. Please check your email; you've got mail!

3922:, which are she/her. That change is not very civil. Thanks! 3600: 3470: 3379:

Hello, Thryduulf. Please check your email; you've got mail!

2562:

Hello, Thryduulf. Please check your email; you've got mail!

1907: 1807: 1168: 1160: 273: 153: 9374:

Knowledge:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft)

8602:

It's not an editor's fault if the tech fails to notify him.

5937:, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand 362:

has been changed from a policy page to an information page.

9817: