Jump to content

User talk:Osomite

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Stuff More Stuff

Thank you for your contributions on Dinosaurs

[edit]

Hi Osomite, We’ve noticed that you edited articles related to Dinosaurs. Thank you for your great contributions. Keep it up! Bobo.03 (talk) 01:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Response on TheSoul Publishing Being Russian

[edit]

@Osomite Even before news articles came out, I myself had suspicions that they are potentially Russian affiliated (anyone who takes the time can see the strange connections). Obviously we cannot say that for sure. I have added a neutral description on the Bright Side Wikipedia page regarding several media organizations supposing they are Russian-affiliated with a statement from TheSoul itself. Perhaps TheSoul needs its own article and/or combine Bright Side and 5-Minute Crafts. I don't know- even if its not an offical tie, the strangeness and reach of their content combined with occasional political overtones has caused me to stay away. I doubt a legitimate propaganda operation wouldn't also operate with profit in mind or at the very least a for-profit company could experiment with propaganda (but not be dedicated to that as a mainstay) See on the talk page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superdadsuper (talkcontribs) 03:15, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is "pyto free environment" hyphenated and could I get your advice?

[edit]

a very good-point. I don't know. I think it will be necessary to convene an assemblage (or is it called a "gaggle") of at least 30 editors and 60 administrators to ponder this point at length. Whatever the outcome, pro-or-con, it needs to be included in the Manual-of-Style so that future hyphenate-type-errors do not occur. Thank you Mini4WD for the heads-up.

Osomite hablemos 22:34, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

[edit]

...for catching my goof at Mad (magazine). I was looking at the wrong Crumb reference to Mad, incorrectly going to this passage:

What else was weird about Weirdo? As Crumb himself wrote in the first issue, the new effort marked "another new magazine, another MAD imitation, another small time commercial feature with high hopes, obviously doomed to fail." This is a reference to the number of MAD knock-offs that appeared during the 1950s and 1960s....

And so I say: D'oh!--Tenebrae (talk) 00:07, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]


D/S Alerts

[edit]

decision here.

WP:ACDS topic areas. 1 January 2021

Retraction, please

[edit]

In this edit you called me an "apologist". From the context, I infer that you meant a "Nazi apologist", since you also referred to my "prodigious efforts to maintain Nazi victory in Poland/" Please retract these untrue and defamatory statements. You can do so by striking them out, using <s> and </s> at the beginning and end of each statement. Your failure to do so will result in your being reported to Wikipedia administrators for a gross violation of WP:No personal attacks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:22, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should I assume that your putting an unwarranted edit-warring notification on my talk page is your way of saying that you refuse to retract your defamatory statements? If you can confirm that you have no intention of retracting, than I can proceed with reporting you to admins for personal attacks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:35, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Beyond My Ken: Previously I put this post on your talk page. I include it here for the record.
By definition, an apologist is "a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial". By inference, you are the one putting the Nazi tag on it. The "context" is what you are making it to be. It seemed to me that Germany's successful invasion of Poland was a Nazi victory. Isn't that the position you have been maintaining?
I did not say you were a Nazi apologist. I am sorry that you inferred that. For the offense you feel, I apologize.
According to Godwin's law, this is the point at which effectively the discussion ends.
Osomite hablemos 22:02, 26 February 2021 (UTC) PS Seriously, stop. If you believe that I am wrong, report me to the authorities.[reply]
And here is my response from my talk page:
No, this is not the end of the discussion, since yours is a classic "non-apology apology". You apologize for "the offense I feel" but do not apologize for your statements. In any case, I did not ask for, and do not want an apology, which is useless to me, what I asked for was a retraction of your statements by striking them out. Without such a retraction, I will be taking this to admins. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:59, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

You have been reported to the Administrators' Noticeboard/Incidents

[edit]

You will find the report here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:26, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You do really go to the ANI and explain yourself.Slatersteven (talk) 13:58, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It has been suggested that your silence and unwillingness to strike the comments will lead to a block, you really do need to start taking this seriously.Slatersteven (talk) 18:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]


@Slatersteven: I appreciate your concern. Thank you. I find this issue very distressing. Sadly it was the last thing I thought about while trying to fall asleep last night (actually at 3 AM) as this dilemma has been weighing on my mind. I do not call people Nazi apologists. I have not called people Nazi apologists. Beyond My Ken through inference (BMK's word) says I did.
Slatersteven, after you made your proposal to me to remove my comments, I thought it was appropriate and was figuring out how to do what you suggested and best seek resolution. Yes, I was silent, the reason was that I wanted to give time to let things cool down. I was upset by the proceedings and want to be able to respond calmly. I was silent, but I was listening. I am distressed that my silence was construed as nefarious. Sometimes a silence is just a silence. I was just listening and thinking. What was the apparent need for urgency? You mentioned that I was "a POV pusher trying to force their version of nationalist history onto the article". Where did that come from? I have no alternate version of history to force. It is very interesting what some people consider the meaning of silence is.
This issue initiated around my "edit" (I apologize for the "scare quotes", but I can't get the dif rename done without them) of the following sentence in the Operation_Sea_Lion article in the section "Invasion of Poland":

In September 1939, the German invasion of Poland was a success, but this infringed on both a French and a British alliance with Poland and both countries declared war on Germany.

My purpose was to edit a poorly constructed sentence and clarify. With the result of:

In September 1939, German invaded Poland. This aggression infringed on a French alliance with Poland and a British alliance with Poland. Subsequently, France and Britain declared war on Germany.

(Oops, I see that I created a typo "German" instead of "Germany".) So I reconstructed a sentence that had a comma splice and unusual conjunction "but". I edited it to make it three sentences. Making the entry more informative and clear was my object. And then I was left with the first sentence where using the word "successful" felt awkward. I have never considered the invasion of Poland "unsuccessful" (as some here have somehow construed). An invasion is either an invasion or a "failed invasion". And I have never seen the use of "successful" relative to "invasion" anywhere. Seeing that accolade in an encyclopedia article did not seem to have a neutral point of view NPOV. So I did not think that using the "successful" necessary. Removing the word "success" or "successful" does not change the meaning of the sentence. I had no hidden agenda with doing this. I had no agenda. I was trying to write the best encyclopedia article I could by removing a word that was unnecessary. After all, was an invasion and the invasion did what an invasion does. And in the edit summary, I indicated, "There is no support for the claim that the invasion of Poland was "successful". And from there BMK disagreed and reverted the entire edit. BMK ignored my edit of the second sentence which was a marked improvement over the original.
Here is an observation. In the Invasion of Poland Wikipedia article, the word "success", relative to the overall invasion, was used once, stating "The success of the invasion marked the end of the Second Polish Republic, though Poland never formally surrendered." Here as with the Operation Sea Lion article, the word "success" is an unnecessary adjective. If the word "success" is removed, the meaning of the sentence is not altered.
The encyclopedia Britannica, when discussing what caused WWII, it simply states, "World War II began in Europe on September 1, 1939, when Germany invaded Poland." Here is a creditable encyclopedia that does not feel the need for touting the invasion as "successful".
Through all of this, I have pondered about "what was Hitler's goal in invading Poland?" What would have been Hitler's criteria to consider the invasion successful? Clearly, Hitler desired to expand eastward to gain “lebensraum” (living space) for Germans. Did the invasion accomplish this goal? Another thought was that Hitler needed to possess Poland in order to launch his offensive against Russia. Yes, the invasion was successful in Germany "possessing" Poland for this purpose. If it is this apparent, why couldn't BMK simply qualify the condition of success? Maybe BMK could have added another sentence or two?
Recently, I read somewhere that with Germany's invasion of Poland and when the Allied Forces entered into WWII against Germany, at that point Germany had already realized that they had lost the war. With that view, it seems a stretch to say the invasion spawned a "success". I guess I need to find that again because there will undoubtedly be contention about this assertion. In any case, this line of inquiry is interesting and needs to be examined.
For some reason, Beyond My Ken has called me "the editor" throughout this entire episode. This is a personal slight, I consider BMK to be rude. There is some psychology involved with not acknowledging a person with their name. To not acknowledge someone is a snub. It can mean to ignore or not take notice of.
For some reason, from BMK's first revert of my initial edit, BMK made no effort to collaborate with me. He has only been brusk, offensive, and threatening. I made a single revert and BMK put the edit war Ambox warning on my talk page accusing "You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Operation Sea Lion;" And then in an additional entry on my talk page threatened, "Your next revert to this article triggers a report to the edit warring notice board". OMG! I made a single revert at 10:35 and a second edit (retaining the word "successful" and BMK's response was to threaten me. Although in the edit war notice it counseled "Users are expected to collaborate with others", BMK never sought to collaborate with me. I highly doubt that BMK's behavior reflected an appropriate protocol.
Throughout many edit exchanges with editors, BMK has been determined to retain the exact original badly constructed sentence with simply the addition of four references supporting specifically for the single word "successful" in the context of "In September 1939, the successful German invasion of Poland". The placement of the references is unusual; they are placed immediately after the word " ". BMK's "edit" (Again, apologies for the "scare quotes") establishes that the references are specifically for just the word "successful", remarking in the edit summary "This is the way it must be done."
I appreciate that BMK has provided references specifically for the word "successful". I plan to track down the books to see whether there is actually a clear statement or analysis stating that the invasion was "successful". After I have been able to do find the books (they are at my libraries) and do the research, I was will report my results. If I am wrong, I will admit that I am wrong with appropriate apologies to BMK. I value truth and I value an honest presentation of history.
I see from the discussions, things have not cooled off. Beyond My Ken has been quite busy prosecuting his case. Is that appropriate? Today, BMK has "redacted what he considers to be personal attacks" in my post on the Operation Sea Lion Talk page. Was that appropriate? It seems that BMK is doing his best to add heat and stir the pot. From this situation, am I going to received fair consideration?
My posts concerned were in reply to "BLM post" (apologies for the "scare quotes") which was initiated immediately after I made "my first and only revert" (apologies for the "scare quotes").
BMK considers the following phrases to be personal attacks. Just to provide a perspective they were not grouped but spread in my post to BMK
  • "to maintain Nazi victory in Poland"
  • 4 lines of text follows
  • "You are disingenuous."
  • 10 lines of text follows
  • "Your argument is largely that of an apologist."
I am truly sorry that BMK inferred (BMK's word) that a word in the first phrase and a word in the third phrase was a personal attack of being called a "Nazi apologist". I am sorry he saw it that way. It was in no way intended to be a personal attack that I had "cleverly hidden". I did make an apology which was heartfelt ("I did not say you were a Nazi apologist. I am sorry that you inferred that. For the offense you feel, I apologize."). However, somehow I did not say whatever magical words BMK thought appropriate and called it a "nonapology apology". Some here have the view that I did not make a "not a genuine apology". Is there some guidance on how to make a genuine apology?
About "apologist". Some who are judging here, consider that because I rebuffed BMK's "success" argument by saying it was "largely that of an apologist" is a personal attack. An apologist is "one who speaks or writes in defense of something". What is wrong with that? That is what BMK did. I did not find BMK's argument convincing.
And about personal attacks. "BMK's reply to me" (apologies for the "scare quotes") contains some significant personal attacks on me:

"I won't take it seriously, because you're so far off the mark that you're entirely around the bend. Ignoring your ignorant personal jibes, the issue here is simple: reliable sources, and every historian worth their salt, says that the German invasion of Poland was a successful one."

BMK tells me, "I am entirely around the bend", calls me "ignorant", and then just claims the authority of historians "worth their salt". That wasn't much of an argument, it was, to me, what you would expect from an apologist who has few facts at hand. It was an insult to me. BMK claims I made a personal attack, which is ironic when BMK freely makes personal attacks; they were personal attacks that were so clear there was no inference needed to understand what they were. I would appreciate BMK's apology for his personal attack on me.
BMK's posts contain quite a bit of disparagement directed towards me; a lot of anger. The tone was arrogant and overbearing. BMK was presenting what BMK considered to be superior knowledge and was quite annoyed at being challenged. BMK took some particularly umbrage with my challenge requesting a reference for the adjective "successful". It seemed to me that BMK was looking for reasons to have controversy and conflict.
About "disingenuous". Here is "my post" and here is the comment in context which was concerned his aspersion that I was edit warring although I only made a single revert:

"You are disingenuous. You were in an edit war earlier this month from which you received a edit block of one month. You contested the block and received mercy. You ended the episode by claiming, "I'll try my best to improve". You need to work on that claim, walk the talk."

It is apparent, and BMK's editing history involving his past edit wars demonstrates it, that BMK is not candid or sincere and is in fact quite disingenuous. He claimed an edit war after I made a single revert, which is disingenuous. BMK would prefer to distract and misdirect and call it a personal attack; however, it is not, it is simply an observation of fact. This is not BMK's first rodeo.
Many words have been written here with many analyses of my words. In a lot of ways, I see this as much in the way of John Godfrey Saxe's poem [The Blind Men and the Elephant] which ends:

"So, oft in theologic wars, the disputants, I ween, tread on in utter ignorance, of what each other mean, and prate about the elephant, not one of them has seen!"

I hope for an honest opinion of the elephant.
Clearly the judges are self-selecting themselves. Can the judges act without bias and fairness?
I feel that the judges have been looking at this episode cherry-picking words, touching only the parts of the elephant that are easily at hand, and making assumptions based upon, probably, a predetermined result. You assume you know all about me and have already passed judgment. You layer assumption upon assumption. You suppose. You guess. You infer.
I feel that I will not find fair judgment here. I wonder that when making your judgments, has all of the record in the posts been reviewed and given equal weight? With BMK making on-going "comments" (again apologies for the "scare quotes") and whipping up the prosecution I feel an unfair finger on the scale.
I have a suspicion that what I have written here is just going to provide more "grist for the mill" with more criticism of what you think I really said and more condemnation.
As you judge me, do you consider Beyond My Ken blameless? Shouldn't his involvement be considered?
I have not challenged anyone's specific already stated determinations. Doing that would probably not change any opinion. I have not addressed every detail. If anyone has a specific question they would like me to address, please let me know.
Osomite hablemos 04:37, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will post this to the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and see what transpires

It might have been more helpful to have condensed this into one or two paragprahs.Slatersteven (talk) 10:54, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Slatersteven: Yes less is more. Good thought. I have never been involved in a personal attack accusation and I had no guidance to follow so I did what I thought appropriate. Ironic, there was much ado about my prolonged silence, and now you want brevity. I was told to reply and that it was serious. I figured if it was serious, I would take it seriously and reply appropriately. I figured I had one opportunity to respond, so I made an effort to put it into perspective. What could I have explained in a paragraph or two? What is the critical issue? The critical defense?
You make a good point, so here is a try at brevity. A focused defence. (Hmm, and after writing the "brief", it is more than a paragraph or two. I did it with as few words as I could)
I have been accused by "inference" that I called Beyond My Ken (BMK) a Nazi Apologist. I did not. "Inference" is "a conclusion reached on the basis of evidence and reasoning." What is the evidence?
In my first post to the conversation, having spent some time carefully crafting it, I discovered when I tried to post I got an edit conflict as Slatersteven and BMK had posted several times while I composed, and I was behind. So I revised the post I was working on to place my somewhat belated comments in context. I "prefaced" with the comment, "I am a little behind on your prodigious efforts to maintain Nazi victory in Poland." I used the words "Nazi" and "victory" as they were prominently used in the back and forth posts between Slaterstevenu and BMK. I picked up on the theme. The words "Nazi attack" in my post were simply an "echoing" of the ideas being discussed. An echo nothing more.
The words "Nazi attack" would not be the ones I would use concerning the issue of "successful invasion". "Nazi attack" was not my original thought about the situation. BMK created the discussion section on the Operation Sea Lion talk page and titled it, "Was the Nazi invasion of Poland a success?" The original use of the word "Nazi" in the discussion done BMK.
Further down in the post, the part that I had tried to post but could not due to an edit conflict situation, I rebutted BMK's argument as being that of an apologist. An apologist, and nothing more. (See my previous post about "apologist", it is just a word to characterize a type of argument).
BMK, who clearly by the talk page discussion, at this point was very annoyed because I challenge the word "successful" and wanted a reference for that conclusion. So BMK, while annoyed (perhaps to the point of anger), read my post and wanted to reply. BMK created out of hole-cloth an imagined insult, a personal attack, because I used the word "Nazi" and "apologist" in the same post. Post hoc ergo propter hocer inferring, BMK decided that I said BMK was a "Nazi apologist". That is not true. I did not infer that, BMK inferred that.
To say that I made a personal attack is not true, I had no intent. I did not call BMK a "Nazi apologist". When I saw BMK's post back to me, I thought, "Oh Dear, where did that come from?" I immediately replied with an apology. Sadly BMK did not think it was not sufficient calling it a "nonapology apology". I am sorry that my apology did not satisfy BMK. At this point, I indicated I was no longer willing to engage (considering BMK's emotional state and imaginings). So I "went silent", which many here thought was a very suspicious thing to do. Note in my post, I said that was what I was intended to do. I invoked Godwin's law. And, I was condemned because I was not replying immediately. My speed of thought and action, unfortunately, does not match others in the Wikipedia world.
So BMK made a personal attack incident report. And here we are, with me defending myself from an "inferred" personal attack. I have been accused of doing something I did not do by "inference". Is inference adequate proof to make it fact? About this inference, I believe that I should be allowed the "benefit of the doubt".

I will post this to the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and see what transpires.

Osomite hablemos 20:43, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good description

[edit]

Hi! I noticed a recent comment you made on an internal forum about BMK and his long-term pattern of behavior. It's something I've encountered myself, but you described it perfectly. Such a frustrating issue, and I'm glad I'm not the only one who sees it. I know commenting like this on the behavior of another editor is a dubious thing to do, but I strongly feel that this kind of thing is an exemplar of why Wikipedia's culture can discourage participation from newer editors. Ganesha811 (talk) 02:34, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's interesting how often people comment that this factor or that factor "drives away new editors", especially when put up against the reality that the majority of new editors - I would think - stick around, get the hang of the place, and eventually become productive editors, and that those who do run off frequently come back with new identities. Sometimes these also become productive contributors, but others, mostly the ones who were "driven off" because their edits were problematic in the first place, become puppetmasters, coming and going with new identities all the time. Now that, to my mind, is the true arrogance, the idea that one can edit whenever and as whomever one pleases, simply because someone dropped a dime on one's bad behavior.
Not everyone is cut out to edit in this kind of platform, which is simultaneously strict and free-form, and I, for one, don't feel that it helps the project much for us to bend over backwards to accommodate those square pegs who don't fit into the round holes we offer.
That you and Osomite (and others) don't like me is something I really can't do much about, not and remain true to myself and my commitment to continuing to improve the encyclopedia, but at least your crowd might recognize that I am committed to it, and that I do improve it, and that (here comes that "arrogance" again) I am more often right than I am wrong. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Beyond My Ken, hi! I do assume good faith on your part, as you describe in your last paragraph. We are all here to build an encyclopedia, and I know that dealing with repeated waves of vandals and trolls might engender a more blunt style than most people.
However, if you're open to a specific suggestion, I have one to make. I've noticed you often revert edits with the summary 'better before'. This is just not helpful. It's unlikely to produce any sort of constructive discussion, since it implies that there was something wrong with the change while providing absolutely no detail (policy-based, grammar-based, or otherwise) about what was wrong with it.
The result is that either you get into an edit war, or a discussion on the talk page that's already on the wrong foot, or, if they don't respond, you bite another editor by so bluntly reverting their contribution. You contribute a lot, but taking the time to give a specific reason for reverts rather than saying "better before", especially when the change is a matter of opinion and not clear vandalism, might help. Ganesha811 (talk) 03:38, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I will think about that. One of the problems is pure volume. I have a lot of pages on my watchlist, and I end up making a lot of edits in response to what's been done to them, so I fall back on "Better before" and "Not an improvement". I used to have a box on my talk page explaining what I mean by those canned replies (which are not so different from these commonly used abbreviations), but I took it down a while ago in a general clean up of the page. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:14, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ganesha811, I appreciate your commiserating about Beyond My Ken's modus. Clearly, my talk page is on BMK's watchlist radar. Amazing how he jumped in and promptly replied to your note to me. It was enlightening to have BMK explain his method and motivation tending his watchlist.
I am not a prolific Wikipedia editor. I read Wikipedia articles and see things to fix. I read about things in newspapers, magazines, and books; I watch movies; I then look to Wikipedia to see what is said. Sometimes I find things to fix, sometimes I find things to add. My goal is to make Wikpedia content accurate and not confusing. A lot of Wikipedia writing is good, but some writing is pretty bad. I fix the bad when I find it.
About my observation on BMK's modus. A while back BMK and I tangled over an edit I made to Operation Sea Lion. It was my first encounter with BMK I was simply trying to clarify a poorly written sentence and in the process removed the word "successfully". BMK reverted my edit and strongly disagreed (he did do an edit summary explaining) and goaded me into an edit war (I thought I had made an improvement, but BMK clearly disagreed) and escalated it to an Administrator's Notice board and added that I made a "personal assault" against him. I was very surprised and offended about how I had been treated. This encounter with BMK was a bad thing, I wondered how it could be fixed.
It seemed to me that BMK was seeking controversy, wanting an argument. He was brusk, bullying, demanding, and condescending. BMK was on the offensive, attacking, leaving no room to collaborate. I came away from this encounter a bit hurt by what I considered a hostile environment--it was not right, it was not necessary. I thought that BMK's behavior was not appropriate visa via the espoused Wikipedia philosophy and policy and guidance about cooperation in writing an encyclopedia.
Since then, I have been trying to figure out what is/was going on with the Wikipedia environment by observing. Recently BMK took umbrage with a newish editor. The editor fixed a run-on sentence, and BMK goaded an editing war about an argument about "proper grammar". The edit argument had no merit, after all, good grammar is good grammar. BMK was harsh to the editor and was wrong in his position. What BMK was doing did not seem logical (what was BMK's motivation?). I felt the editor need support so I stepped in and pointed out how BMK was behaving badly. But, BMK refused to see anything but his point of view. This encounter was a bad thing happening in Wikipedia.
With Beyond My Ken having joined the conversation with you, and you with having made the good suggestion to him about edit summaries, and BMK acknowledging, may be . . .
I need to reply to Beyond My Ken congenially to seek resolution. I would prefer to like him.
Osomite hablemos 05:20, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
<personal attack by IP editor redacted>
{{rpa}}. It's OK to disagree with BMK's editing but name-calling is against our WP:NPA policy. – EdJohnston (talk) 03:38, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
EdJohnston, you removed a personal attack that was made by an anonymous IP editor (an attack against Beyond My Ken, perhaps, as no specific editor was named in the post that was removed). Inadvertently (I hope), you made your statement quite ambiguous--it appears damning to me due to a lack of information to the contrary. Your comment makes it appear that I made the personal attack and not an anonymous IP editor. I realize that few people read my talk page and would see your comment, but in the spirit of accuracy, could you clarify who did what to whom? I would appreciate it. Osomite hablemos 20:52, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:56, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021 chide

[edit]
Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Veracity of statements by Donald Trump shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. PackMecEng (talk) 23:33, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PackMecEng: quit being a bully. You are have initiated this supposed edit war over your agitationist view that facts must have a NPOV. You are arguing against the facts and the truth. Or is your starting an edit war with me personal? Or as your recent Block from editing on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard shows, are you are just looking to create controversy and be generally disagreeable. Your apparent Trump revisionist agenda is not a good look. Why are you so set against having the truth told about Trump? Is the truth a threat to your weltanschauung?Osomite hablemos 00:12, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I was not the first one to revert you nor the last to disagree with your edit. You are welcome to take me to ANI or AN if you wish. You appear to be hear to WP:RGW. PackMecEng (talk) 00:14, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@PackMecEng: My, my, my. You do carry on so. Trying to mount a defense to justify your behavior is so pathetic.
Please quit posting comments on my talk page (actually, please quit doing it anywhere in Wikipedia) about things you demonstrate little understanding.
"Righting Great Wrongs?" That's a pretty feeble effort at gaslighting. You are accusing me of the behavior you are engaging in yourself. Clearly with your false "not NPV" claims, you are in the WP:RWG mode trying to rewrite history to falsely burnish Trump's legacy which consists of tens of thousands of lies. You clearly have a very, very big job ahead of you defending the beloved Supreme Leader.
Go away. Go bully someone else.
Osomite hablemos 20:09, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just so you know, there is nothing particularly personal in PME's behavior, they do this sort of thing quite often - I keep having to warn them about following me around to comment on things I post. (An admin offered to block them for it, but I didn't feel like compiling the evidence that would have been required.) For laughs, you should read this (the part that's been collapsed) and their "discussion" of the block that resulted from it on their talk page [1]. It's almost surrealistic. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:16, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Next Housekeeping deletes begin here. . .

Skeuomorph revision

[edit]

Hey! I noticed you undid my change to Skeuomorph to add the Flag of the Haudenosaunee. What is the reasoning behind this not being a skeuomorph? The stair-stepping on the tree in the middle of the flag was a necessary structure in the original belt because it was made from beads. The design of the flag is explicitly fashioned after the design of the belt, and although the stair-steps are no longer needed, they are still included. --Blacklemon67 (talk) 23:22, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blacklemon67: This type of discussion should be on the Skeuomorph Talk Page. I am going to move your comment there and provide my reply.

The Signpost: 24 April 2022

[edit]
The second case of Wikipedian persecution.
What's hot in the media this month.
Writing Wikipedia, joining the armed forces, and volunteering.
"Our proud Sparta bleeds too."
Plus, a new status page and Desktop Improvements.
We showcase the best content that Wikipedians offered this past month.
A multi-national encyclopedia tries to move forward.
Wiki Loves Monuments 2021 winners announced.
How a war map predated Wikimedia's map of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Why not just link to an article to attribute famous photographers?
Plus deaths, films, and the 2022 FIFA World Cup qualification.
And other new research findings
The deceptively simple Strengthening Measures to Advance Rights Technologies Copyright Act of 2022.
An elegant Wikipedia essay.
A serious statement of Wikipedia policy.
A look at when the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees was reorganized.

The Signpost: 29 May 2022

[edit]
Your two new Signpost Editors in Chief.
Plus, Form 990, fundraising, RfA and UCoC.
Community shortlisting in an affiliate-based process, and a poll for you to speak your mind.
A little more information, please.
A varied collection of "special operations", and interviews.
Tales of hope, perseverance and even a little humor.
A new approach at the article level.
We summarize the drama for you.
March 2020 WikiProject report interviewees return discussing project's evolution and future.
Plus, Growth Features configuration, the Hackathon, and more.
Showcasing the very best articles, pictures, videos, and other contributions from Wikipedians last month.
An interview with queer Wikimedians.
Stopping them from taking your photos from Commons.
And other recent research findings.
Helpful advice from Tips of the Day.
Were Johnny and Amber exchanging blows?
Photos raise awareness for nature protection and human impact on nature.
New regulations governing online censorship.
A lighthearted video recalling the 2006 incident.
Exploring Featured Pictures of the world's oceans.
A look at when The Onion published an humorous article regarding Wikipedia.
On creative works.
Test your word-puzzle skills!

Books & Bytes – Issue 50

[edit]

The Signpost: 26 June 2022

[edit]
Office actions to secretly delete stuff when told to? Well, at least not if they're Putin's.
Belarusian Mark Bernstein to serve 36 months of "home chemistry" for unapproved posting, Slate covers historically large adminship bid, UBI economist with goofy infobox caption thinks it's funny.
A review of Wikipedia's fundraising messages and financial status.
Just three for the history books this month (or not).
Famed FP ace steps up to run main page outfit. Millions tremble in fear, or something.
And who can forget the black-breasted buttonquail.
Don't be dumb, says math whiz: avoid the gambler's fallacy. Illustrated for your pleasure.
Tables "like to socialize" and "share genes": ooh la la!
What's the deal with Anita Forrer, redlinked woman of mystery who saved Schwarzenbach archives?
Google and Internet Archive sold on new product, more customers hoped to follow.
Plus editing stampedes for cheery subjects: shootings, deaths, and virus.
Lest Southern Hemisphere be forgotten.
Can we offer you a nice crossword in this trying time?

The Signpost: 1 August 2022

[edit]
The future of stuff? Who knows, but two articles were written by a computer this month.
Wikipedia and human rights, publishers and the Internet Archive, Russia and Wikipedia.
Real news or silly season?
IGNORANCE IS NOT STRENGTH.
"This year's victory was sad and dull."
Candidate op-eds, open question spaces, and more.
Was Minecraft YouTuber a GNG pass in life, or only in death?
Mass murderers, sex criminals, Ponzi schemers, insider traders, and business people.
The last three months of arbitration through the eyes of a GPT-3
GPT-3 whips it out.
And when is 'today'?
The world shows its messy complexity.
More lists expected next month.
It doesn't have to be a pain in the butt!
PAC2 explains the item documentation template.
Education, climate change, and journalism.
Zoom and enhance.
And other new research findings.
But Commons is a treasure trove.
All the things about theatre that the general public misses out on.
Ten years ago, Russian Wikipedia went dark in protest of new Russian laws. Today...
Strange mysteries of our animal world.

The Signpost: 31 August 2022

[edit]
jimmy@wikipedia.org donate@wikimedia.org (not a typo?) wants a moment of your time.
Why the 'Festival Edition' was less than perfect, and what we can do better.
But Annie Rauwerda is the real thing!
2022 elections, new page patrol, Fox News, Vector 2022, Royal Central and external links
Change and stability.
All there is to know about userboxen.
Sometimes Citation bot is not enough.
Plus, the Private Incident Reporting System, and new bots & user scripts!
One exterior, one interior.
Also includes a campaign to "Suck for Luck".
And other new research
Because there really is no real theme this month you can grab onto to give a catchy title.
Some articles aren't worth saving
Edinburgh in August.
Because the Signpost needs a cartoon.
The Signpost looks back on The Signpost: New reports, conceived in a spirit of collaboration, and dedicated to the proposition of information and, uh, more information for all.

Administrators' newsletter – September 2022

[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

  • A discussion is open to define a process by which Vector 2022 can be made the default for all users.
  • An RfC is open to gain consensus on whether Fox News is reliable for science and politics.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • An arbitration case regarding Conduct in deletion-related editing has been closed. The Arbitration Committee passed a remedy as part of the final decision to create a request for comment (RfC) on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion (AfD).
  • The arbitration case request Jonathunder has been automatically closed after a 6 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

  • The new pages patrol (NPP) team has prepared an appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) for assistance with addressing Page Curation bugs and requested features. You are encouraged to read the open letter before it is sent, and if you support it, consider signing it. It is not a discussion, just a signature will suffice.
  • Voting for candidates for the Wikimedia Board of Trustees is open until 6 September.

Left field

[edit]

Sorry about the confusion - I was referring specifically to the use of the source as being not entirely random. Don't want to get back into that discussion; just want to apologize for the communication differences. I'm from the Ozarks and have a rural background so I learned a somewhat bastardized version of most common English idioms/pronunciations/spellings/grammatical constructions that can be at time confusing. Hog Farm Talk 13:55, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm:, I appreciate hearing from you. No worries, it's all good.
I understand about rural idioms and such. Sometimes I encounter the same things-especially about pronunciation and I am particularly bad at spelling as I am slightly dyslexic. I have to work hard in getting writing right. I hail from a very rural part of Northern Eastern California. I had a neighbor from Missouri and I loved to listen to her talk. We lived high up in the Sierra Nevada mountains and whenever she talked about going west into the central valley, she would say about "going down below". And talking about something "over there", she would say "yonder". A wonderful lady. And since many of the older timers (way back then), like my grandmother, were one generation removed from the gold miners of the 1849 gold rush, they had their way with words also. Good memories.Osomite 🐻 (hablemos) 20:31, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 52

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 52, July – August 2022

  • New instant-access collections:
    • SpringerLink and Springer Nature
    • Project MUSE
    • Taylor & Francis
    • ASHA
    • Loeb
  • Feedback requested on this newsletter

The Signpost: 30 September 2022

[edit]
Candidates sign off and peel out – Sigalov is on and Peel is in.
Just what is NPP? Why does it need the WMF? Why does it need YOU?
Was Katherine Maher a former encyclopedia salesperson?
The latest from the Wikimedia Deutschland Movement Strategy & Global Relations Team.
Source reliability, NPP, and appearance discussions.
Find out firsthand what our newest admin, ScottishFinnishRadish, does with a chainsaw.
Some Articles for Deletion just drag on.
Suggestion: promote removal of visible copyright signs of images under a CC-BY license.
And other research news.
Repeat after me: I solemnly swear not to put "oh my!" in a headline.
This month: A FACBot upgrade, a completed list of lists.
Lo!
When Commons gives you a blank space...
Yes, again.

Administrators' newsletter – October 2022

[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to Preferences → Gadgets and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 31 October 2022

[edit]
Or maybe the spit -- only time will tell.
News from Twitter, Commons and the WMF C-Suite.
501(c)(3) application approved, Amazon donates another million.
Wading into several controversies.
I can has Kremlin sockfarms?
And other new research publications.
The newest sysop speaks on the process that got them there.
Featured content from October.
The strength of Wikipedia is the peer review afterwards.
More serial killers than you can shake a stick at!
What tales echo in these hallowed halls.

Administrators' newsletter – November 2022

[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Portola

[edit]

Sorry, you're claiming that it's pronounced both por-TOH-lə and like "power-tall-ah", while claiming that they're the same. I suspect that you aren't familiar with the key, but if you are adding a second pronunciation, you need to provide a source. YouTube is good enough. Can you find someone on YouTube pronouncing it the way you think is correct? — kwami (talk) 02:24, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwamikagami: I think that your reclama and knowledge about this issue would be better placed on the Portola talk page rather than hiding it on my obscure talk page. Inquiring minds will want to know.
I will put this discussion on the Portola talk page. Please make your responses there.
I see from your user page that you have knowledge about how words are pronounced.
Your last edit on the Portola article you deleted my pronunciation of "pour|toll|'|ɑh". It has been in the article for quite some time. Wikipedia guidance tells that long-time-standing edits should not be changed without some talk page discussion and agreement first. Why didn't you just leave it alone?
I am puzzled, "power-tall-ah"? Where did that come from? Do you think that my "pour" comes out as "power"; "ur" sounds like "wer"? Seriously. Please explain how/where you came by that. Sounds made up for argument's sake to me.
I guess that I don't understand the obscure rule about creating that dialectical pronunciation of a place name. Where in the wide wide world of Wikipedia guidance is that explained? You say that a "reference" to the local dialectic pronunciation is required. Where exactly in the literature of the world would one find that reference? Surely you jest. I laugh that you think youtube is a reliable source. What do you want me to do, create a youtube titled "This is how you pronounce the name of the small rural town of Portola, California" and say the word Portola correctly pronounced many many times, and maybe, for no particular reason, read the Wikipedia article. Do you see how silly that idea is? And, by the way, Wikipedia does not consider youtube to be a reliable source.
I see that in your most recent edit you deleted the native area pronunciation (that I rendered to the best of my ability) of "pour|toll|'|ɑh"; or should I have presented it as "pourtollah"? I know this is the sound of how the folks in the area speak the town's name. I know because I live there. I hear it spoken that way almost every day. Why is it that you disagree about something you have never heard?
I don't quite understand how you rendered the "respelled" pronunciation as "por|TOH|lə". Where did you hear that pronunciation? I am particularly curious about the last syllable "lə"? You think that "la" has an unexpected vowel sound so you represent it with the schwa symbol? So if it is an unexpected vowel sound, what is is the actual sound?
In my local knowledge, the last syllable of "Portola" sounds distinctly like "ah". The last syllable consists of just the "a"; the "l" is spoken in the second syllable with the "to" and that sounds like "toll". Yes, I know, the hill folk of the eastern lost sierras speak funny. When you use "por" as the pronunciation of the first syllable, does it sound like "pour"?
Please tell me how you have expert knowledge about the pronunciation of the name of the village hamlet Portola? (I remember on the Today show in June 1960, when David Garraway mentioned that "the village hamlet of Portola (and he actually pronounced it as a Portolian would expect) is being threatened by forest fire". That was all he said--I heard it and I was gobsmacked that the news of the day from New York was about such an isolated place. So, every now and then, I like to use Dave's description of my town--village hamlet; however, it isn't hamlet-like.)
In one of your edit summaries, (or perhaps it was the edit you made on my talk page and then subsequently deleted--tsk, tsk. That was bad editor manners. If I want something on my talk page deleted, I will delete it) you wanted to "hear" the pronunciation. If you need to "hear" Portola spoken how do you know that the "funny" and unreadable, at least to me, International Phonetic Alphabet rendered pronunciation of (/pɔːrˈtoʊlə/) that has been in the article for quite some time, is correct? If you don't know how it sounds, how can you vouch for that pronunciation? Perhaps "(/pɔːrˈtoʊlə/)" should be deleted.
As background concerning the pronunciation of Portola and the reason for my involvement, an editor arrogantly assumed that the word was actually pronounced according to the Spanish language like the name of the explorer Gaspar de Portolá y Rovira for whom the town is indirectly named--that is a story in itself that I will include in the article after I have the necessary references that I hope to find in the Bancroft Library at Cal. So to correct that incorrect attribution, I edited and provided the native dialectic sound for the name and explained on the Portola talk page about the how and why of the edit.
I just realized that there is a district in San Francisco named "Portola". It is pronounced "close" to the lost sierra dialect, but not exactly. That pronunciation would be acceptable, but it would not be exact.
Osomite 🐻 (hablemos) 05:00, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I stopped reading your response when it became clear that you weren't being serious. We just can't take your word about something. You need evidence. And yes, if you have, say, the local news station pronouncing "Portola", or an interview with the police chief, that would probably be acceptable evidence for most people. — kwami (talk) 05:39, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kwamikagami: You stopped reading my response? How rude. I read your responses without stopping. It is petty of you to be criticizing my writing style.
Please note that I pointed out to you that further comment on this issue should appropriately be done on the Portola talk page. But you are ignoring my reasonable and logical request. Why is that?
I am requesting, make that demanding, that you no longer post on my talk page. I am within my rights to bar from positing here--there's guidance about this somewhere in the Wikipedia monolith but I am not going to find it for you.
I would like to point out that you need to add edit summaries when you post. Empty edit summaries are not satisfactory
You are discounting my position because you don't consider it to be serious. That's pretty arrogant. Don't you have a sense of humor? Is the world of posting pronunciations always deadly serious? If so, that is so sad.
There is content in my post which is quite relevant and on point, but you are ignoring it. I guess that is the easy way out for you, just disregard any argument that challenges your position. It seems you quit because you have nothing to support your position--all you are doing is citing a rule you have made-up and demanding evidence. When you post a new or revised pronunciation, where do you find your reference (aka evidence)? You clearly have no expert knowledge of the correct pronunciation of the word Portola, yet you refuse to address my position by falsely claiming superior knowledge and intelligence concerning the pronunciation of words. OMG!
Addressing your demanded acceptable proofs, there is no local radio station in the county--it is really rural and damn near dirt poor. And about "an interview" with the Chief of Police", there is no Chief of Police. The law enforcement is the Sheriff of Plumas County located in the county seat. In any case, where would this interview have taken place where the word "Portola" would be correctly pronounced? Were you anticipating that a recording of a radio station there would be available? Your thinking is a bit ivory tower, what planet are you living on?
As a Wikipedia editor aren't you supposed to honor the Wikipedia's Five Pillars? Consider the pillar that directs that "Wikipedia's editors should treat each other with respect and civility". This includes a basic tenant of seeking consensus and avoiding edit wars. And, notice the 5th pillar--Wikipedia has no firm rules.
I asked questions, and you are ignoring them. You demand evidence but you will not attempt any collegial effort or cooperation. What rule can you site that requires that I must render to you evidence about the pronunciation of the word "Portola"?
And once again, I will also add this post to the Portola talk page.
I hope you have read this far and not stopped earlier due to your opinion of my writing style. If you refuse to engage by posting on the Portola talk page, I will consider that you have surrendered the discussion.
Osomite 🐻 (hablemos) 09:04, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 53

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 53, September – October 2022

  • New collections:
    • Edward Elgar
    • E-Yearbook
    • Corriere della Serra
    • Wikilala
  • Collections moved to Library Bundle:
    • Ancestry
  • New feature: Outage notification
  • Spotlight: Collections indexed in EDS

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:19, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 November 2022

[edit]
Joe Roe's close sows dough woes, manifestos... vetoes? overthrows?
Ineffective altruism, return of the toaster, Jess Wade keeps wading through it, Russia censors searches, schools embrace Wikipedia.
An interview with Wikimedia's Chief Advancement Officer.
Oh, just one more thing... AI couldn't help but notice you use that punctuation a little bit more than most people...
Are government goons prowling our fair encyclopedia?
Have we gotten past the point where better articles makes us a better encyclopedia? And what comes next?
Heather Ford's new volume on Wikipedia, knowledge and power in the 2011 Egyptian revolution.
Facebook's Galactica demo provides a case study in large language models for text generation at scale: this one was silly, but we cannot ignore them forever.
Okay, six hundred, but either way, the bionic editor speaks.
Productively doing nothing
And other research findings.
Do consider joining FPC, though: we need you.
They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old: Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
A lost article from our deep annals
The weeks and weeks, as reviewed by Wikipedia's readers.
Search upgrades, lawsuits, paid editing, and personal reflection.
A toast to good health, a health to good hoax, a hoax to good toast.

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2022

[edit]

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

CheckUser changes

removed TheresNoTime

Oversight changes

removed TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A new preference named "Enable limited width mode" has been added to the Vector 2022 skin. The preference is also shown as a toggle on every page if your monitor is 1600 pixels or wider. When disabled it removes the whitespace added by Vector 2022 on the left and right of the page content. Disabling this preference has the same effect as enabling the wide-vector-2022 gadget. (T319449)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 1 January 2023

[edit]
Plus admin update and cool tools for the new year.
Sometimes you need to read more than just the headlines!
Interview of ComplexRational about their recent request for adminship.
Wikifunctions might drag it down.
Frustrations and successes.
Congratulations.
And other new research findings.
How Iranian press agencies help Wikipedia to reflect football in a better way.
You head into the featured content report. Amongst the features you see astronauts, both Gilbert and Sullivan, Ursula K. Le Guin's incredibly talented mother, and Billboard charts. It is pitch black, you are likely to be eaten by a grue.
It is mostly about football!
In which a couple sentences of text recontextualises an image.
Photographers, Sandy Hook, the shocking use of Nazi symbols in articles about Nazis, and "You wouldn't recognise a fact if it bit you in the ass".

Administrators' newsletter – January 2023

[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Voting for the Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
  • Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent Coolest Tool Awards.

The Signpost: 16 January 2023

[edit]
It's not just a phase! Well, maybe it is.
Long-time contributors imprisoned for 32 and 8 years after "swaying public opinion" and "violating public morals".
UCoC draws nearer, alongside the rise of the machines, in mainspace this time.
Wikipedia's birthday, a cute dog, and nipplefruit.
The depths of Commons, at your fingertips. Or eyetips.
Debunking widely-told myths about New York's grandest and centralest railway station.
The economics of Wikipedia.
When notability conflicts with what it might be used for.
7,000,000-year Landmasses for Subduction discussions considered "too long".
Allow us to bring you back, back, back, to days of Wikifun rampant.
...and your ambigram. Also: Boring lava fields, birds of Tuvalu, and commelinid family names with etymologies.
War, sports, and all types of chaos.
The editor with five million edits, the death of Aaron Swartz, and rollback.

Books & Bytes – Issue 54

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 54, November – December 2022

  • New collections:
    • British Newspaper Archive
    • Findmypast
    • University of Michigan Press
    • ACLS
    • Duke University Press
  • 1Lib1Ref 2023
  • Spotlight: EDS Refine Results

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:15, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2023

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Vector 2022 skin has become the default for desktop users of the English Wikipedia.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Voting in the 2023 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2023, 21:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
  • Voting in the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey will begin on 10 February 2023 and end on 24 February 2023. You can submit, discuss and revise proposals until 6 February 2023.
  • Tech tip: Syntax highlighting is available in both the 2011 and 2017 Wikitext editors. It can help make editing paragraphs with many references or complicated templates easier.

The Signpost: 4 February 2023

[edit]
Last issue's vow for "something to show for these efforts" revisited.
As well as the continued rise of the machines, and Amanda Keton's WMF departure.
Section 230 before the Supreme Court in two cases, with broad implications for the web.
Or Santos on Wikipedia?
WMF issues salvo in latest battles of the Posting Wars
The good, the bad, and the ugly.
Isamaa party sponsor Parvel Pruunsild files claim in Tartu County Court against WMEE head Ivo Kruusamägi and Reform Party politicians.
English Wikipedia among most "global" and Thai Wikipedia's among most "Western", but non-Western works neglected overall.
And other new research publications.
An interview with those who pitch in together
Letting you find out about yourself (and others).
An exceptionally good period for featured articles.
Can we have a chat?

The Signpost: 20 February 2023

[edit]
UCoC Enforcement Guidelines pass, Wikimedia Enterprise financials, GPTs gone wild, and a speedy deletion criterion removed.
Also: Russ Baker's BLP, the digital commons, the NSA, and more on Pakistan.
Gautam Adani and his companies possibly behind scheme featuring scores of socks, infiltration of articles for creation process.
GPT: friend or foe?
Your one-stop hooker's handbook.
But much else to be found.
Lovey-dovey stuff for Valentine's.
And maybe a side of AI.
Also: let's delete images of Muhammed! Let's delete portals!
Yesterday's controversies, reported on today.
A musical interlude.

Administrators' newsletter – March 2023

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The 2023 appointees for the Ombuds commission are AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, JJMC89, MdsShakil, Minorax and Renvoy as regular members and Zabe as advisory members.
  • Following the 2023 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Mykola7, Superpes15, and Xaosflux.
  • The Terms of Use update cycle has started, which includes a [p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.

The Signpost: 9 March 2023

[edit]
A lack of transparency.
Using failed AI Galactica's worst mistakes to test a new AI.
Probable answers: No, no, maybe?
Seriously, even the chef has a major military history connection.
And other new research publications.
Wikizine, Wikipedia Zero, Single User Login, and Wales allegedly editing his girlfriend's article.

Books & Bytes – Issue 55

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 55, January – February 2023

  • New bundle partners:
    • Newspapers.com
    • Fold3
  • 1Lib1Ref January report
  • Spotlight: EDS SmartText Searching

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:46, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 March 2023

[edit]
Be part of the Wikimania 2023 program!
One year in: volunteering, science, art, and candlelight.
Everything is broken, again.
Seriously, it's only a fortnight's worth!
An interview with Wikipedia's newest admin.
All the pop culture that's fit to print, with a sprinkling of cocaine (bear).

The Signpost: 03 April 2023

[edit]
Errata regretted.
Skynet believed to be in violation of the new Universal Code of Conduct.
Taking the phrase "gaming the system" to the next level.
Desysop case request still in accept/decline phase.
Thou gildest e'en the Signpost's trade.
And a dataset of article revisions to provide a corpus for promotional content.
A retrospective of the best and worst pranks.
Do important banks sock? Maybe – but don't grab your money and run just yet!

Administrators' newsletter – April 2023

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration


The Signpost: 26 April 2023

[edit]
Plus: Wikipedians get own Mastodon account, and Wikiprojects move to uniform quality assessment.
Covering Russia, Poland, the Vatican, the U.S., and the "perilously thin" boundary between real life and Wikipedia.
The prolific editor, former Arbitration Committee member and co-founder of Wikimedia New York City died in April.
No news is good news, and this isn't no news.
The problem we haven't solved.
Can Wikipedia help keep AI agents honest?
In this article, we will look at The Signpost statistics. More precisely: Signpost article statistics by year, TOP 20 titles of Signpost articles, TOP 20 article authors, and the home wikis of article authors.
First of a two part series summarising the priorities for the Wikimedia Foundation's next fiscal year (July 2022–June 2023) including staffing, budget and other changes, and how to provide your feedback.
And somehow made it more readable than when it's not rhyming.
2011 and on.
The Selfish Hatnote, the Disambiguation Singularity, and other information-theoretic conundra of encyclopedic note.
Wrestling bumps world-changing technology from the #1 spot, imagine that.

Administrators' newsletter – May 2023

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 8 May 2023

[edit]
... and at WP:Mastodon.
Fake fines, false alarms and faux headlines!
And other new research publications.
...Layout lovers will hate this featured content's title.
There will likely be more to say next issue.
The second article in a series describing the priorities and work of the Wikimedia Foundation. The article invites Wikimedians to collaborate with the Foundation.
First national-level conference in the Indian subcontinent in seven years.

The Signpost: 22 May 2023

[edit]
... and a referendum on Jimmy Wales' traditional role as a final court of appeal in arbitration policy.
Opposing scholars on ArbCom case.
Includes stronger sourcing restriction, and a nod to the UCoC.
And other new research results.
Bird is the word for featured pictures.
Celebs and Bollywood film dominated reader interest, as usual, but with a new persistent presence on the lists of a certain AI.
An online conference with 12 distributed trans-local in-person meetup "Nodes" on 5 continents.

Books & Bytes – Issue 56

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 56, March – April 2023

  • New partner:
    • Perlego
  • Library access tips and tricks
  • Spotlight: EveryBookItsReader

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:04, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 5 June 2023

[edit]
Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee Building Committee Commences Command By Convening.
Also: Goog gets delist ask for en-wp yt-dl ar-ticle, wacky football fails.
Now is not this ridiculous, and is not this preposterous? A thorough-paced absurdity - explain it if you can.
Plus mortalities, and movies about mermaids.

Administrators' newsletter – June 2023

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
  • As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.

Technical news

  • Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 19 June 2023

[edit]
Problems with emergency emails sent to WMF.
... and an AI writer explains why he just bought a paper encyc.
Poetry still present.
And other new research findings.

Administrators' newsletter – July 2023

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).

Administrator changes

added Novem Linguae
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed MBisanz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Two arbitration cases are currently open. Proposed decisions are expected 5 July 2023 for the Scottywong case and 9 July 2023 for the AlisonW case.

The Signpost: 3 July 2023

[edit]
... and a new Elections Committee.
A few editors who fought many times to keep advertisements out.
Are you now, or have you ever been, a Wikipedia editor?
In which featured pictures have a pleasing orange/blue colour scheme for some reason.
Don't worry, they are mostly harmless.
Mission to ensure stability in conflict-ridden area.

The Signpost: 17 July 2023

[edit]
Gitz666 unglocked, Wikimania scholarships given and a new admin anointed.
Ruwiki on the Ruinternet, Rauwerda on TEDx, and Jimbo on Fridman.
Philadelphians and Tanzanians say goodbye.
The collaboration process for the 2023 English fundraising campaign is kicking off now, right from the start of the fiscal year.
Wikidata queries investigate nepo babies.
A summary of various tools designed over the years.
And various other research on large language models and Wikipedia.
Bold move intended to "get some variety" into Wikipedia arguments.
The annual report that tries to understand the Signpost through data, written in 2020, which never saw the light of day until now.
In which choices have been made™.
Sex, drugs and violence, English, math and science.

Books & Bytes – Issue 57

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023

  • Suggestion improvements
  • Favorite collections tips
  • Spotlight: Promoting Nigerian Books and Authors

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 August 2023

[edit]
And French gov't proposes legislation to slam Wikipedia, others.
Or just another brouhaha?
Hot damn, it's damned hot!
Three editors have departed.
You don't really want to do this stuff by yourself, do you?
A serious visual investigation.
A compilation of over 3M citations.
Possible solutions after being re-harassed.
Due to unfortunate events, this issue is published as is, in its unfinished state.
Oppenheimer, Barbie, and a couple other scandals.

Administrators' newsletter – August 2023

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2023).

Administrator changes

added Firefangledfeathers
removed

Interface administrator changes

added Novem Linguae

Technical news

Arbitration


The Signpost: 15 August 2023

[edit]
Jimbo promises more transparency, Wikimania in Singapore, move away from Tides still planned, and Wikifunctions rolls out.
Harsh words from problematic fave Glenn Greenwald.
Rigorous Review of Content for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Wikipedia.
Damn kids need to get off our lawn and onto RfA.
Because one gets some secondary skills when one has 645 featured pictures.
The innards of the Signpost received a major overhaul in March/April 2019. Here's how we reduced behind-the-scenes busywork and improved writers resources.
For whom does the Creative Commons enforcement clause toll?
An announcement of 335,000 new images on Wikimedia Commons.
Some improvement on last week.
Case request cited misuse of tools by administrator who last used tools in 1661.
Barbenheimer, Pee-Wee Herman and the Women's World Cup.

The Signpost: 31 August 2023

[edit]
News for the editoriat. Stuff that matters.
Wikipedia really comes into its own, editorially and artistically.
"Poli", which means "many", and "tics", which means "under-the-table Wikipedia article whitewashing campaigns".
And other recent research publications.
The good, the bad, and the nonsense.
A message from the Counter-Fun Unit.
I just poured HOT GRITS down my pants ohh yeah

Administrators' newsletter – September 2023

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
  • A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.

Miscellaneous

  • Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.

Books & Bytes – Issue 58

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 58, July – August 2023

  • New partners - De Standaard and Duncker & Humblot
  • Tech tip: Filters
  • Wikimania presentation

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --14:27, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 September 2023

[edit]
Plus: Africa news, funding report, U4C draft, roads fork and another ChatGPT block.
Plus a new judge, an "unimportant" record, and staying in the swim!
A Wikipedian and a friend.
Non-flammable, BPA-free, and really whips the llama's ass.
Covering all of August. Pretty much.
The Signpost brings you the latest from the source.
Sports, film and singers. We've got it all!

The Signpost: 3 October 2023

[edit]
Finances during Tides Foundation management of the endowment are shown for the first time.
Plus Harvard, Yale, Lords and Commons, partners and trolls!
And other new research publications
The first issue to feature two poetry article
Material must be written with the greatest care and attention; the level of detail and commentary regarding the antlers of living persons is to be kept to a minimum.
Tamzin reflects on the hunt.
Taylor Swift with an NFL tight end and Lauren Boebert with a Democrat?

The Signpost: 23 October 2023

[edit]
Long time passing
Also: High fives, Wikipedia as a guide for counterfeiters and crossword makers, and Iskander at the UN.
The benefits of research.
These titles never make much sense even at the best of times, so why not be random?
They are still fighting.
Sounds good!
"Cite altered state" to join the distinguished ranks of CS1 templates

The Signpost: 6 November 2023

[edit]
"Is this an ArbCom case request or an M. Night Shyamalan movie?"
Plus Gaza bias, Speaker Johnson, Maher, the music of websites, and antisemitism.
And three new admins!
You should learn some of our rules!
The winner is...
Do you ever wonder where Wikipedia articles come from?
And other new research findings.
Only literally.
A systematic approach.
Plus Kollywood, Killers of the Flower Moon, and ongoing war.

Administrators' newsletter – November 2023

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2023).

Administrator changes

added 0xDeadbeef
readded Tamzin
removed Dennis Brown

Interface administrator changes

added Pppery
removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 12 November 2023 until 21 November 2023 to stand in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections.
  • Xaosflux, RoySmith and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2023 Arbitration Committee Elections. BusterD is the reserve commissioner.
  • Following a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
  • Following several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
  • Following a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
  • Following a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
  • An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 20 November 2023

[edit]
Comic-con, Media summit, and a classic!
Plus: Sockpuppet investigators asking for help.
Or if it's Indian sport or cinema.
And other new research findings.
Scholarship applications for Wikimania 2024 are now open!

Books & Bytes – Issue 59

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 59, September – October 2023

  • Spotlight: Introducing a repository of anti-disinformation projects
  • Tech tip: Library access methods

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:16, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 December 2023

[edit]
Just as his term was ending!
Plus Apple Pay, fiction, registration, expulsion, and elimination!
An analysis of a literary mystery.
Continuing years of efforts to improve free-to-read access.
"I think we ought to read only the kind of comics that wound or stab us. If the comic we're reading doesn't wake us up with a blow to the head, what are we reading for?" — Franz Kafka
And so are you.
Quite literally, and other fascinating featured articles, pictures and lists
If you don't fancy the sport that occupies over 25% of the slots in these lists, there's always movies, celebrities, and political follies to fall back on – or an unusual fired-for-the-weekend CEO.
This page in a nutshell: Whether or not someone has denied unsavory allegations — though such a denial may not merit being given equal weight in an article — a worthless shitpost should still be included.

Administrators' newsletter – December 2023

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
  • The Arbitration Committee has announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
  • Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 11, 2023 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.

The Signpost: 24 December 2023

[edit]
Wikipedia article histories are public records that can be easily examined, so unlike other websites, we can answer this question thoroughly.
Not the best of times for Wikipedians across the world, but there are still glimpses of hope...
Forky on forky on forky, plus a strange donation scheme and other interesting bits of news.
Wiki goes dark and adopts Palestine flag logo; intellectual property rumblings from the bowels of the law.
Wikimedia Russia closes after founder is declared a "foreign agent".
No more must Wikipedia always be a lightbulb in the dark — except metaphorically of course.
And other new research publications.
Peace on earth, goodwill to all!
the dilution makes it stronger.
The Signpost Crossword is a 2018 online multiplayer social deduction game that takes place in space-themed settings where players are colorful, armless cartoon astronauts.
Bollywood, Hollywood, and both kinds of football to close out December.
The debugging will continue until performance improves.
Heartwarming — MUST READ — You Won't BELIEVE #4!!!!!
Winner receives a special prize!
Edit summary: "Only need this page for about 30 minutes to demonstrate to a friend how easy it is to create a Wikipedia page. Then it will be deleted."

Administrators' newsletter – January 2024

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 10 January 2024

[edit]
The Signpost can now drink beer and chant slogans in Canada. What slogans should we chant for the next nineteen years?
Mickey & You: What can you do?
A techie looks at the big questions.
Let the games begin! The 2024 WikiCup is off to a strong start. With copyright enforcement, AI training and freedom of expression, it's another typical week in the wiki-sphere!
The first of two installments, regarding a process of many installments.
Watch out for those space ships!
What are the editorial processes behind covering some of the most politically polarizing and contentious topics on English Wikipedia?
Rest in peace.
Around the world in 365 days (with many stops in India).
The good news is that I've perfected the templates that allow other people to make actually good crosswords.
Getting down to brass tacks &c.

Books & Bytes – Issue 60

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 60, November – December 2023

  • Three new partners
  • Google Scholar integration
  • How to track partner suggestions

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --13:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2024

[edit]
Plus WMF child rights impact assessment, Chinese Wikipedia changes admin rules
A stream of consciousness about plagiarism on Wikipedia from the perspective of a user who directly witnessed it.
And how you can stop them!
Another wobble, more Ackman, our usual pathological optimist, and football in dirty pants!
Everything you really wanted to know about writing featured articles.
And other new research publications.
Writing a good subheading for a one-sentence joke is basically like writing an entire second joke so I'm not going to do it.
Job changes, death, sex, murder, suicide and a vacation!

Administrators' newsletter – February 2024

[edit]

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

CheckUser changes

removed Wugapodes

Interface administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

  • Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
  • Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 13 February 2024

[edit]
"the exact extent of the obligations" unclear... many such cases!
Lower, trust me!
Finding the right bumblebee among all the bumblebees!
The usual odd articles about Wikipedia.
The hunt for Bertil Ragnar Anzén.
Plus films, Grammys and a rumble!
&c.
That's more than weakly!

Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 2 March 2024

[edit]
Plus, the U4C Charter keeps planting seeds, the RfA process is set to become more sustainable, and more news from the Wikimedia ecosystem.
And other new findings
Plus, naughty politicians, Federal judge not a fan, UFOs and beavers.
Rest in peace.
If you say it loud enough the views will come your way!
135 battle it out; 67 advance

Books & Bytes – Issue 61

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 61, January – February 2024

  • Bristol University Press and British Online Archives now available
  • 1Lib1Ref results

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 29 March 2024

[edit]
Much effort was spent drafting a movement charter about becoming "essential infrastructure of the ecosystem of free knowledge". How much is spent maintaining it?
Signpost interviews Wikimedia Foundation leadership on fundraising banners
And does it have anything to do with the unusual decision to let a zero-edit user open an arbitration request?
Can we compete with social media? Will aoomers forget Wikipedia?
And several papers look at climate change on Wikipedia
WLM winners announced, Wikimania 2024, a new Wikimedia movement affiliate, and active enwp admins reach a record low.
Worldwide women turned blue and controversies on Serbian & French Wikipedia.
Let me take you to the movies.
The only worthwhile grievance is the one that prompts satire.
margin: 0 auto !important;

Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

Books & Bytes – Issue 62

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 62, March – April 2024

  • IEEE and Haaretz now available
  • Let's Connect Clinics about The Wikipedia Library
  • Spotlight and Wikipedia Library tips

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 April 2024

[edit]
Plus, tribute songs and shout-outs outweighing vandalism and hoaxes, a dispute about the real king of the platform and other bits of news.
Plus, new updates on the privacy and research ethics whitepaper and the graphs outage situation, and an Iranian former steward is globally banned from Wikimedia projects
Outcomes of the event including newly published videos and photos, the archived conference website and program, and some attendee reflections on its significance.
A WikiProject report on the 📰🌍 globe's finest news source!
And other recent research publications
Plus Godzilla meets Francis Scott Key!

Administrators' newsletter – May 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

readded Nyttend
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed Nihonjoe

CheckUser changes

readded Joe Roe

Oversight changes

removed GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 16 May 2024

[edit]
WMF trustee elections, U4C results, Italian ArbCom, WMF and Endowment annual reports.
We don't know yet, but there is some encouraging news, nevertheless.
Some go out with a bang, some with a whimper, few with much of a comprehensible explanation.
Plus, the WMF joins the Unicode Consortium, Chris Albon talks about AI tools on Wikipedia, communities address under-representation on the site.
More queries are failing, and more frequently, so what is to be done?
It do be like that sometimes.
With cricket and some cute baby reindeer!

Administrators' newsletter – June 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

readded Graham Beards
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed

Oversight changes

removed Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 8 June 2024

[edit]
The Form 990, as well as highlights and FAQs, are now available for review.
A new model for collaboration between the WMF and the community?
Hoaxes and the genesis of information.
First line, sixth paragraph, body text or unified Reich?
Outlining progress against the four key goals
A letter.
And various research findings about Wikidata and knowledge graphs.
No we didn't write it, but we tried to cite it
An essay.
... and flagging your articles with big ugly red notices! (This is a good thing.)
Movies, deaths, elections (but no cricket).
Some stuff's only okay in the privacy of the home.
Project in shambles – "it had never occurred to us that this was possible".
Hypertext.

Just wondering why you added my editor data to one of your user pages

[edit]

Doug Weller talk 07:54, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doug
Your name is on one of my talk pages serendipitously. Over the years, whenever I encounter something that is interesting and I do not have time to fully comprehend its content and such; I copy it to my talk page so I can read it later and keep track of it to see how things turned out. In one of those "save for later"' items, was from 2020 something about "left sidebars". So when I copied the post, you had commented in the conversation, your name was included. So that is why your name is on one of my talk pages. Nothing sinister. Out of curiosity, what prompted you to read my talk pages? I don't have any problem, it's ok that you did, I just want to know the back story. Osomite 🐻 (hablemos) 21:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Doug
PS
I did a little more research. Your name is on my talk page purposely. When I encounter an editor who is interesting I include it an section "Editor Stuff". At some point I found you interesting and want to follow (not stalk) your postings. So you are interesting and occasionally I would look at your contributions because you are interesting. If you have a concern about with this, I will wiling remove your from my interesting "Editor Stuff". Osomite 🐻 (hablemos) 21:38, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that you should remove all names or better state why user names appear on your talk page. I have user names and user talk pages linked on mine too but it clearly states why they are there and generally it is because of a good encounter or something I learned from them. Had you been more concise, depending on your reasons, it may have been looked at and dismissed. As it stands right now it has become disruptive and concerning to some of the editors mentioned. Probably best to just remove. You can watchlist certain pages to keep up with subjects you are interested in. --ARoseWolf 12:59, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ARoseWolf
About my talk page section "Interesting Editors". There is nothing sinister or nefarious about it. I am puzzled how it is has “become disruptive and concerning to some of the editors mentioned.”
The content "Interesting Editors" is the result of several years of taking note of editors that I have encountered while editing an article, or have "come across" their posting in various talk pages and various "request for" pages. These editors catch my interest because of what they write, how they write, and in many cases because they are quite humorous. These editors I wanted to follow to see what they might "create". In some cases I would want to follow an editor because I might learn something from their massive efforts in creating and editing articles. I would look in on their talk pages to "see what might be going on".
In short, I follow editors because I enjoy observing Wikipedia's sociology, culture, and editor interaction "behind the scenes". It is quite interesting.
I realize how my "Interesting Editors" section "got into the spotlight". A couple of days ago I realized that my "Stuff" talk page was quite big and cumbersome. So I realized I could create a subpage to move some sections to so I could do some talk page housekeeping and cleanup and deletions. I created "More Stuff" which was a new page which apparently the new page patrol took notice.
You say if I documented each editor with why I "follow" them it would be OK. I have looked over "Interesting Editors" and I can not recall why I have added so many editors which I was interested in following. Thinking back, I would add editors who were involved in discussing a particular subject or "request for" issue or editing wars.. And after the discussion ended, I didn't delete those editors. And as the years went by I just "added new interesting editors" to the top of the section and basically ignored and forgot about the "bottom of the list".
So that is where I am at.
What is occurring makes me weary. I have to defend myself about something that you say has “become disruptive and concerning to some of the editors mentioned.” Somehow I don’t find this surprising considering the Wikipedia culture.
ARoseWolf, I appreciate your advice. But I wonder, what exactly have I done that is wrong? What rules have I violated?
The nature of this entire episode has reaffirmed my view of the Wikipedia environment. Rather than approaching me with concerns, it was an attack (ok, pretty strong word), a confrontation. It was done with little "collegiality" (one of the pillars of Wikipedia) and was quite abrupt. It was done almost ambiguously with an editor asking why that editor's name was on my list, And then an editor claimed that I made personal attacks on editors in that section. (There are no personal attacks in my “Interesting Editors” section.) All of this was very cynical and unfriendly. In my experience, the Wikipedia environment is just another type of “social media” culture where editors, being basically anonymous, take offense easily, are rude, offensive, and fail to have any sensitivity about how they behave. It is easier to be angry than to be friendly.
I am a bit distressed that I have been confronted about this situation. As I see often in Wikipedia, a mountain is made of a molehill and it becomes a can of worms.
Yes, I have written quite a bit about this mole hill. I thought that I needed to explain my “Interesting Editors” on the record so whoever could understand what is actually what.
I fail to see any rule that indicates that what I have accumulated is prohibited. What I have done is not a threat to anyone, I have had this accumulated list for several years, I have used it, and have never used it for any nefarious purpose. It is passive. I am sorry that editors imagine that it is considered a threat to them.
I will not just delete my “Interesting Editors” section. I need it for my process to engage in the Wikipedia. I will clean it up. If that is not satisfactory, make it an issue of a “request for” or whatever.
I am sorry if I have inadvertently offended. I apologize. Osomite 🐻 (hablemos) 19:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I fail to see any rule that indicates that what I have accumulated is prohibited
You were given links to three rules that do just that. Viriditas (talk) 19:59, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my God..have I finally been accepted into....dun-dun-deeerrrrr, the Illuminati?!?! Or at least the No Homers' Club.Halbared (talk) 09:57, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Halbared
The Illuminati? Say what? Osomite 🐻 (hablemos) 21:16, 19 June 2024 (UTC
What does the Geneology tag mean in your other stuff?Halbared (talk) 22:09, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not possible. I didn't send an invite. Chairman Doug and I have a matter of grave importance to discuss. Apparently they ran out of gummy bears as an ice cream topper in the cafeteria. --ARoseWolf 20:02, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ARoseWolf
Your post is most puzzling. I like a good puzzle. About running out of gummy bears, that's a shame. You can never have tooo many bears.. Osomite 🐻 (hablemos) 21:19, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Osomite: It's easy for all the editors you blue-linked to find out that you blue-linked to them. I've read that section, and it sounds very much like you are criticizing editors, not just innocently keeping track of interesting discussions. Please be aware of the WP:Attack page policy. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:21, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Tryptofish: Evidently you did not read my "Interesting Editor Stuff" section very closely. I have carefully read it to see what "sounds very much like you are criticizing editors" comments I might have made in your opinion. Tryptofish, I don't see what you see. If there is a criticism, it is content that I did not originate, but copied from its source.somewhere on Wikipedia.
I would appreciate it if you would point out any criticism of editors that "I posted" in that section so I can remove them.
Out of curiosity, what prompted you chime in on this post?
Osomite 🐻 (hablemos) 22:02, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
D ;).Halbared (talk) 22:11, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've taken time to think about it, and I've carefully read your explanations here, and then I re-read the editor stuff with your explanations in mind. I guess I can see how you have, over time, found certain discussions or editors interesting or amusing, and wanted to keep track of what you encountered. But, without a whole lot of explanation, what it looks like is that you are assembling a sort of log of editors you want to follow, along with references to administrator actions taken, to various scandals, and to situations in which various editors were criticized. Regardless of what you might have intended, it comes across as a sort of "enemies list". If I try very hard to WP:AGF, I can make a rationale for why you do not intend it that way. It's worth considering the policy at WP:Harassment#Hounding, for what it says about tracking other editors' edits, and the need "to avoid raising the suspicion that an editor's contributions are being followed to cause them distress". WP:NOTWEBHOST also puts some limitations on what you can keep in user space, just because you find it interesting. I know you said that you don't want to delete the section, but I suggest that you think seriously about doing so. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:28, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tryptofish
"it comes across as a sort of "enemies list"." Seriously? Do you realize how paranoid that sounds. To say that I have created an "enemies list" is insulting to me. What in the "Interesting Editors" section supports your supposition? You are not adhering to the Wikipedia behavioral guideline of "Assume Good Faith" WP:GOODFAITH which in part says, "Unless there is clear evidence to the contrary, assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it. If criticism is needed, discuss editors' actions, but avoid accusing others of harmful motives." What "action" have I taken? I would appreciate an apology for that accusation.
Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, said, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar". And I point out, "Sometimes a list is just a list", Don't extrapolate the purpose of my "Interesting Editors" list with little information and a lot of imagination.
You have fabricated a current situation as well as a hypothetical future, that I am evil mastermind with some nefarious plan to do "something" that will upset the natural order of Wikipedia. The horror, the horror.
I am getting very weary of this, My list has existing for many years. In all those years, I have not harassed or confronted any editors. I don't have any of those intentions. Please quit assuming things.
If I am considered a threat in the opinion of any editor, if there are editors that remain upset after the explanations I have made, they can approach me directly and tell me what they believe and how I am an actual threat to them. Doing that will put some actual substantial evidence into this Salem Witch Trial environment (yes, that is quite a cliche and hoary trope, but it seems quit appropriate to me). I will apologize to those editors and remove their user name from my "interesting Editors" list.
At this point I consider what is happening is harassment. Please stop.
. Osomite 🐻 (hablemos) 04:14, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know better than to assume malice but I am still thoroughly confused about why I'm on that list. Aside from the initial drama when I was briefly known as SinglePorpoiseAccount (a play on words that some people didn't find too amusing) I don't recall doing anything particularly significant here. Maybe you could add a little context? MrPorpoise (talk) 23:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now that...was a good name.Halbared (talk) 23:07, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your user page may not meet Wikipedia's user page guidelines. It is intended for basic information about yourself, your interests and goals as they relate to editing Wikipedia, as well as disclosures of conflicts of interest and paid editing. Although a lot of freedom is allowed in personalizing your user page, it is not:

The user page guidelines have additional information on what is and what is not considered acceptable content. Please use your user sandbox or the draft article space to practice editing or to create new articles. Thank you. Viriditas (talk) 00:24, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 4 July 2024

[edit]
Three new admins, but overall numbers still shrinking.
Will we weather the storm?
Unbundling, automation, fighting spirit, and a bot named Reimu Hakurei.
Debate unsettled after seventeen years.
Advocacy organizations, a journalist, mycophobes, conservatives, leftists, photographers, and a disinformation task force imagine themselves in Wikipedia.
A journey to a sister project.
Rest in peace.
An article about Etika's appeal and legacy in pop culture.
A virtual visit to the Inland Northwest.
"Simply not good enough".
How well do you know the main page (no peeking)?
...!
Special:Diff/1 and related techno-trivia more complicated than you'd think.
And other new publications on systemic bias and other topics.
Elections, movies, sports.

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

added
removed

Technical news

Miscellaneous


Books & Bytes – Issue 63

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 63, May – June 2024

  • One new partner
  • 1Lib1Ref
  • Spotlight: References check

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:16, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 July 2024

[edit]
Iconic photograph, invalid fair use exemption criterion #3a claimant, or both?
Establishment of power-sharing agreement between WMF corporation and volunteer user community in limbo.
Natalia Tymkiv, Chair of the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation, on the Charter vote results, the resolution, meeting minutes, and proposed next steps.
A lost Signpost submission from fifteen years ago brought into the light, as good and true now as it was then.
Failing forks, smart and well-researched stories, LGBT rights, and oral sex!
Rest in peace.
Do you know these Wikipedia quotes?
Dems in disarray, GOP in chaos — analysts say news expected, but few can predict how race will shape up from here.

The Signpost: 14 August 2024

[edit]
A STORM over an AI that writes articles. And other notes of interest.
And other findings.
Musk's Twitter acquisition and rebranding have caused long debates on Wikipedia.
And Movement Charter ratification vote comments have been published
Possibly paid articles.
HouseBlaster's reflections on his RfA. In particular, do not ask superlative questions.
Just normally weird!
Come in, you whippersnapper, have a cup of tea.

Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

removed Pppery

Interface administrator changes

removed Pppery

Oversighter changes

removed Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 4 September 2024

[edit]
JCW compilation now tracks free DOIs, Wiki Loves Monuments getting started, WMF's status as UN observer stymied by China for fourth time.
Updates from the Portland pol's case, the war in Gaza, and other Wiki-related reports.
And other new research findings
Who are they, why are they running and what are they bringing to the Board?
What all happened in Katowice?
Hannah Clover shares her fondest memories of her first Wikimania.
The Olympics (yay!) and the American election (oh no).
"I can't remember whether he is an incompetent moron, or an incorrigible POV warrior, or some other thing, but either way, to hell with him."

Books & Bytes – Issue 64

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 64, July – August 2024

  • The Hindu Group joins The Wikipedia Library
  • Wikimania presentation
  • New user script for easily searching The Wikipedia Library

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --16:34, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2024

[edit]
ANI (but probably not the one you're thinking of), bias and bans, crisis and Clover, Engelhorn's euros, and will the zoomers inherit the project?
In response to a takedown request, Wikipedia editors reached a consensus on how to handle it appropriately.
User Hawkeye7 opens up on his experience as a media representative following the Australian team at the latest Summer Paralympics in Paris.
User asilvering reflects on their recent successful request for adminship.
More changes to RfA on the way in October, final results for the U4C elections revealed, and other news from the Wikimedia world.
Picture this: medicine, drugs, JFK, Cleopatra, anachronism, and global catastrophe.
And other recent research publications.
Band reunions and Beetlejuice!

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


The Signpost: 19 October 2024

[edit]
Find more about the new Trustees, the first election cycle for admins, and other news from the Wikimedia world.
And other searchings and findings.
Perplexing persistence, pay to play, potential president's possible plagiarism, crossword crossover to culture, and a wish come true!
Can it be fun to address systemic bias? Eighty participants say yes, it can!
Help me make it through the night!
A novel about us, from the point of view of three of us.
Where do I even start?
Pasta, acronyms, and one computer-crashing talk page.

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

readded
removed

CheckUser changes

removed Maxim

Oversighter changes

removed 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


The Signpost: 6 November 2024

[edit]
But not everybody is able to legally read Wikipedia, and not everybody is able to legally edit Wikipedia.
Defamation, privacy, censorship, and elections.
Plus human knowledge and Ozzie places!
Asian News International, the Delhi High Court, and the encyclopedia.
Your photos are more valuable than you may realize.
What is going on?
And Tata too!
IP address privacy tools, and mysterious archive sites.
Many such cases.

Books & Bytes – Issue 65

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 65, September – October 2024

  • Hindu Tamil Thisai joins The Wikipedia Library
  • Frankfurt Book Fair 2024 report
  • Tech tip: Mass downloads

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:50, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 November 2024

[edit]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2024

[edit]

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

Administrator changes

added
readded
removed

Interface administrator changes

added
readded Pppery

CheckUser changes

readded

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration


The Signpost: 12 December 2024

[edit]
New arbs to be seated in January.
Will the fifth try at achieving peace be a mudfight, or something better?
Should old acquaintance be forgot?
An editor's reflection on social capital and their changing relationship with Wikipedia culture.
by Tamzin
Wikipedia aims to represent the sum of all knowledge. Is there an imbalance between Western countries and the rest of the world.
Ballooning British bias bombast!
Fighting and killing – on screen, in politics, and in the ring – competes for attention with Disney.
The importance of feedback.

The Signpost: 24 December 2024

[edit]
What the VLOP – findings of an outside auditor for "responsibilization" of Wikipedia. Plus, new EU Commissioners for tech policy, WLE 2024 winners, and a few other bits of news from the Wikipedia world.
A personal essay.
Explanations for what led to it and what it was like to undergo it.
Plus, the dangers of editing, Morrissey's page gets marred, COVID coverage critique, Kimchi consultation, kids' connectivity curtailed, centenarian Claudia, Christmas cramming, and more.
Who's news?
And other new research findings.
Good faith edits REVERTED and accounts BLOCKED.
Peace on earth, goodwill to all!
Wicked war, martial law, killing, death and an Indian movie with a new chess champ!

Your mention of me on your user page

[edit]

Hello, I'm glad you found me and my recent Signpost article interesting enough to mention on your user page User:Osomite/Stuff/More Stuff. I found it while doing a wikisource search for markup about my Signpost page. Just one correction though: I'm not one of Wikipedia's earliest editors, by a long way ... the site was already four years old when I started! Graham87 (talk) 14:11, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Graham, what can I say? What you have contributed is (what's a word for ultra amazing?), oh, it's ultra amazing. And how you have done it is also ultra amazing. Even if you weren't "one of the first", your starting is basically during the mists of the beginning--it was a long, long time ago.
Being an "old timer", you definitely qualify as someone, to me, who is quite interesting.
Part of my interest in Wikipedia is the interaction editors have with editors and the interactions that editors have with admins. I sort of study the sociology of the Wikipedia world.
Your situation with blocking editors and having the Wikipedia "powers to be" chaste you, to me, was questionable. It seems to me it was the frequently occurring Wikipedian act of ganging up to punish. I see this happening a lot. Sadly, I think that there is a culture of disfunction within Wikipedia that is very toxic and dysfunctional. The fact that editors have to continually be reminded to "not bite newbies" demonstrates that "the blame game and hypercritical opinions" is ongoing. I think this bad behaviors is sort of similar to what occurred in the Stanford prison experiment. Sometimes, people exceed the authority of their role.
I have been editing Wikipedia off and on since 2007 and I still find Wikipedia to be a monolith. I have difficulty finding information within Wikipedia. I am continually searching and searching to find references that should be obvious/easy to find. But the basic things I have to keep looking for are not obvious nor easy to find. I have to keep notes (on my stuff talk page) for things I have found in Wikipedia. Somehow I think a function should be added to Wikipedia to provide a universal search of all of the various rules and methods to allow a friendly interface into the monolith. And, since I have continuing problems with the Wikipedia environment, I was very impressed with your facility and capability in an environment I find difficult.
Thanks for your note. Osomite 🐻 (hablemos) 01:24, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
PS I find your story to be compelling (admiration in a powerfully irresistible way).Osomite 🐻 (hablemos) 22:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2025

[edit]

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Books & Bytes – Issue 66

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 66, November – December 2024

  • Les Jours and East View Press join the library
  • Tech tip: Newspapers.com

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --17:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 January 2025

[edit]
The 20th anniversary of The Signpost.
A lot of psephology!
HUMINT or humbug?
Hallelujah!
Johnny Au has edited for 17 years straight without missing a day.
Some thoughts from the original editor-in-chief.
Public Domain Day 2025, Women in Red hits 20% biography milestone, Spanish Wikipedia reaches two million articles, and other news from the Wikimedia world.
The Signpost staff on achievements of '24 and hopes for '25.
The latest crusade?
Our alumni speak!
Applying the scientific method to a model of conflict that leads to arbitration.
This post fact-checked by real Wikipedian patriots.

Administrators' newsletter – February 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2025).

Administrator changes

readded
removed Euryalus

CheckUser changes

removed

Oversighter changes

removed

Technical news

  • Administrators can now nuke pages created by a user or IP address from the last 90 days, up from the initial 30 days. T380846
  • A 'Recreated' tag will now be added to pages that were created with the same title as a page which was previously deleted and it can be used as a filter in Special:RecentChanges and Special:NewPages. T56145

Arbitration


The Signpost: 7 February 2025

[edit]
But an open language model is ready to help.
The WMF executive team delivers a new update; plus, the latest EU policy report, good-bye to the German Wikipedia's Café, and other news from the Wikimedia world.
Editor Fathoms Below reminisces over their successful RfA from February 2024.
Plus, reports on the ARBPIA5 case, new concerns over projects targeting Wikipedia editors, John Green gets his sponsor flowers, and other news.
Wikimedians and newbies celebrate 24 years of Wikipedia in the Brooklyn Central Library. Special guests Stephen Harrison and Clay Shirky joined in conversation.
Ending with some bans, and a new set of editing sanctions.
The start of the year was filled with a few unfortunate losses, tragic disasters, emerging tech forces and A LOT of politics.

The Signpost: 27 February 2025

[edit]
French Wikipedia defends a user against public threats, steward elections, and other news from the Wikimedia world.
"The only time I ever took photos in my entire life".
From patrolling new edits to uploading photos or joining a campaign, you can count on the Wikimedia platform to be up and running — in your language, anywhere in the world. That is, except for a couple of minutes during the equinoctes.
Or just the end of Wikipedia as we know it?
Of "hunters", "busybodies" and "dancers".
User Sennecaster shares her thoughts on her recent RfA and the aspects that might have played a role in making it successful.
What are they? Why are they important? How can we make them better? And what can you do to help?
Liberté, liberté chérie.
Grammys, politics and the Super Bowl.
Straight from the source's mouth. A source is a source, of course, of course!
Turkish linguist wrote about languages and plants; Brazilian informaticist studied Wikimedia projects and education.

Administrators' newsletter – March 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2025).

Administrator changes

removed

CheckUser changes

removed

Oversighter changes

removed AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • A new filter has been added to the Special:Nuke tool, which allows administrators to filter for pages in a range of page sizes (in bytes). This allows, for example, deleting pages only of a certain size or below. T378488
  • Non-administrators can now check which pages are able to be deleted using the Special:Nuke tool. T376378

Miscellaneous


Books & Bytes – Issue 67

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 67, January – February 2025

  • East View Press and The Africa Report join the library
  • Spotlight: Wikimedia+Libraries International Convention and WikiCredCon
  • Tech tip: Suggest page

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --18:48, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 22 March 2025

[edit]
It's an ecstasy, my spring.
Let them know what you think!
Read this, then forget all about it.
Life on the Wiki as usual!
And WMF invites multi-year research fund proposals
The Oscars, politics, and death elbow for the most attention.
The photographers are the celebrities!
And very unusual biographical images.
Send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.

Tech News: 2025-13

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 22:39, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-14

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 00:02, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2025).

Administrator changes

added
readded Dennis Brown
removed

Bureaucrat changes

added Barkeep49

CheckUser changes

added 0xDeadbeef

Oversighter changes

removed GB fan
readded Moneytrees

Miscellaneous


Tech News: 2025-15

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 18:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 9 April 2025

[edit]
Fellow doctor Osama Khalid remains behind bars for "violating public morals" by editing.
Major changes to core content policy, or still-developing plan for new initiative?
Defeat, or just a setback?
Plus: 30-year anniversary of wiki software commemorated.
Our content is free, our infrastructure is not!
What is to be done?
Advice to aspirants: "Read RfA debriefs", including this one.
Rest in peace.
Snow White sinking, Adolescence soaring, spacefarers stranded, this list has it all!
The Wikimedia Foundation's announcement from Diff.
Gadzooks!

Tech News: 2025-16

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 00:21, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-17

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 20:57, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-18

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 19:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 1 May 2025

[edit]
As always, Wikimedia community governance relies on user participation; plus, more updates from the Wikimedia world
Scrapers, an Indian lawsuit, and a crash-or-not-crash?
And other new research findings.
And don't bite those newbies!
And don't bite those newbies!
Television dramas, televised sports, film, the Pope, and ... bioengineering at the top of the list?
Community volunteers network among themselves and use technology to counter attacks on information sharing.
A look at some product and tech highlights from the Wikimedia Foundation's Annual Plan (July–December 2024).
Hey! At least it is something!
Zounds!
Would a billion articles be a good idea?
There's a lot more to this than you think.
I wonder about having crats, but decided to become one anyway.
Just beautiful photos!
Rest in Paradise.

Tech News: 2025-19

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 00:12, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2025).

Administrator changes

added Rusalkii
readded NaomiAmethyst (overlooked last month)
removed

Interface administrator changes

removed Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

Miscellaneous


Tech News: 2025-20

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 22:35, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 68

[edit]
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 68, March–April 2025

In this issue we highlight two resource renewals, #EveryBookItsReader, a note about Phabricator, and, as always, a roundup of news and community items related to libraries and digital knowledge.

Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:19, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 May 2025

[edit]
And comment is requested on a privacy whitepaper.
And other courtroom drama.
And how he knows it: all about lawyer letters and editing logs.
Why the language barrier is not the only impediment to navigating sources from another culture.
And QR codes for every page!
When an editor is ready to become staff at a public library (not a brother in a fraternity).
Rest in peace.
The technology behind it, and the other stuff.
Gadzooks!
And more.

Tech News: 2025-21

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:10, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-22

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 20:02, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-23

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:52, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2025).

Administrator changes

removed

Interface administrator changes

added 0xDeadbeef

CheckUser changes

readded L235

Oversight changes

readded L235

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to determine whether the English Wikipedia community should adopt a position on AI development by the WMF and its affiliates.

Technical news

Arbitration

  • An arbitration case named Indian military history has been opened. Evidence submissions for this case close on 8 June.

Miscellaneous


Tech News: 2025-24

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 01:14, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-25

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:36, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-26

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:18, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 June 2025

[edit]
Admins arrested in Belarus.
Pardon our alliteration!
A get-out-of-jail card!
And other new research publications.
Holy men and not-as-holy movies.
Get your self-nomination in by July 2nd!
After two years RuWiki fails to thrive.
With some sweet-and-sour sauce!
Every thing you need to know about the Wikimedia Foundation?
Egad!

Tech News: 2025-27

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:38, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Books & Bytes – Issue 69

[edit]
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 69, May–June 2025

In this issue we highlight a new partnership, Citation Watchlist and, as always, a roundup of news and community items related to libraries and digital knowledge.

Read the full newsletter
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team – 13:11, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2025

[edit]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2025).

Administrator changes

removed NuclearWarfare

Interface administrator changes

added L235

Guideline and policy news

Miscellaneous

  • The 2025 Developing Countries WikiContest will run from 1 July to 30 September. Sign up now!
  • Administrator elections will take place this month. Administrator elections are an alternative to RFA that is a gentler process for candidates due to secret voting and multiple people running together. The call for candidates is July 9–15, the discussion phase is July 18–22, and the voting phase is July 23–29. Get ready to submit your candidacy, or (with their consent) to nominate a talented candidate!

Tech News: 2025-28

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 00:02, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-29

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 20:06, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 July 2025

[edit]
Endowment tax form, Wikimania, elections, U4C, fundraising and a duck!
And how do we know?
Five-year journey comes to healthy fruition.
Wikimedians from around the world will gather in person and online at the twentieth annual meeting of Wikimania.
As well as "hermeneutic excursions" and other scientific research findings.
The report covers the Foundation's operations from July 2023 - June 2024
A step towards objective and comprehensive coverage of a project nearly too big to follow.
Drawn this century!
How data from the Wikipedia "necessary articles" lists can shed new light on the gender gap
Annual plans, external trends, infrastructure, equity, safety, and effectiveness. What does it all mean?
Rest in peace.
Wouldn't it be nice without billionaires, scandals, deaths, and wars?
If you are too blasé for Mr. Blasé and don't give a FAC.

Tech News: 2025-30

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 23:39, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2025-31

[edit]

MediaWiki message delivery 00:23, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]