User:Lourdes/Talk archive2

Lourdes, sorry but I’ve opened a review on your block on Cassianto [1] it’s heavy-handed and frankly embarrassing. - SchroCat (talk) 12:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

SchroCat Thanks for informing. Guess am late to respond. Warmly, Lourdes 00:52, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Ah, hello Lourdes, I'm sure you'll know me so no introductions necessary. Firstly, thank you for blocking Eid-al Wiki, who made a disgusting accusation of antisemitism, levied at a friend of mine with not even so much as a diff. Well warranted, I say. With regards to my block (which embarrassingly for you was overturned within a few hours, oops), I have to say that it's a funny way of introducing yourself to someone with whom you have never met. I would've settled for a "hello" and a friendly clip round the ear, or a "hello" and a retraction plea, both with AGF in mind. Sadly, you chose the familiar route that some admins unfortunately go down which is to let the block button do the talking. Never a good move and in my experience, it always ends in tears. One does have to question the morality in you thinking that an unfounded personal attack of antisemitism is as bad as someone saying "happy as a pig in muck". I can only imagine that it was personal, but heaven knows why.

I used to keep pigs. Lovely creatures. Not dirty in the least and very intelligent. It is true, they are at their happiest when rolling around in organic matter and belching from copious amounts of slop consumption, almost on an hourly basis. That doesn't make them bad. Certainly not akin to someone alleging that someone else is a raging antisemite with no evidence to show for it. Lastly, bless you, please take note for the future that I never appeal a block. I don't know what makes you think I need this place as much as you think I do, but frankly, I'd rather put my gentleman's vegetables in a food blender and roll around in TCP for week than to beg to come back here. It's a toxic place, but one I quite enjoy creating articles for - god only knows why! Anyway, no need to apologise, I shall mark this one up as an unfortunate slip on your behalf - I certainly won't judge you for it. Happy editing! Cassianto^Talk 16:59, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Cassianto, hello. Firstly, thank you for your positive contributions to Wikipedia; do please continue doing them. To be candid, I'm actually pleased that despite all your multiple blocks over your tenure, you continue to also edit productively here and invest a significant amount of time improving articles. I know it's an odd way to compare this to judicial systems but I think I see the logic that many editors are making – perhaps, making you improve articles is the community service that is required here, rather than a block... That every time you constructively contribute, is the time taken away from you that you may have invested elsewhere to follow your personal inclinations. In that light, I have to say, every time I would notice your positive contribution, would give me immense pleasure and personal joy. Thanks for dropping in. Keep editing. I'll keep watching and rolling over (with happiness please, not with laughter – but you know the difference) – Wikipedia needs you more now than ever ❤️ Love, Lourdes 00:52, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Well, your heavy-handed block now sits pride of place at the top of my block log, along with the other 12 or so that were non-warranted and found to be wrongly applied, made by other block-happy administrators. Thanks for that, and with not so much as even an apology. Cassianto^Talk 07:28, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh, you're still loitering around here. That's a disappointment. I was hoping the last dressing down would have been enough. Like I advised earlier, go ahead and please continue your community service, rather than having your priorities wrong and getting repeatedly humiliated here. That it Cass, get going boy, on with your edits, tata. Lourdes 14:38, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh, your ramblings of incoherent nonsense, above, was a "dressing down", was it? How hilarious. I don't quite know what it is that you do around here, other than to go around and piss people off by using the block button as a means to communicate, but whatever it is, go fourth and multiply. Actually, no, don't do that. I think one's enough. Cassianto^Talk 15:19, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

:) Like I said Cass, get over your infatuation with me and move on to improving articles. Don't start leaving childlike edits just because a pretty face has talked to you for the first time and given you some well-deserved advice. And you don't have to keep coming back here again and again just to talk to me – I am not the solution for your socialising issues. Think of all the people who are watching your contributions – you're making a wallowing mess of yourself. Let not the heading of this section become ironic. Stand up, clean up, move on. Go ahead and do what I and the community want you to do – improve articles. I'll be watching. Ta, Lourdes 22:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Good evening. You have been on-and-off in the past month or so. Are you busy in real life, or traveling in real life, or having health issues? Is everything all right? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:31, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, how have you been? Sorry went out of touch. You're right. Went off the grid and still coming to terms to manage different worlds. I'm writing more to you on email. Love, Lourdes 03:37, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

I am fine, thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:09, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

How are you? Are you all right, and just choosing to take long wikibreaks, or is something wrong?

I am wondering about when we could go with the RFA. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:50, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Bob, sorry for this delay. But yes, now we can. Lourdes, 09:26, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:46, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda. Love, Lourdes, 09:26, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

You sure have been quiet. Is everything ok? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 18:23, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Atsme, sorry for such a long delay in responding. Was just sorting out RL stuff (and still am). Love, Lourdes 09:26, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

	Merry Christmas Lourdes
	Hi Lourdes, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and healthy New Year, Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia,    –Davey2010Talk 19:56, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Davey2010. Merry Christmas and a happy new year. Love, Lourdes 05:22, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

	Merry Christmas Lourdes
	Hi Lourdes, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and healthy New Year, Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia,    –Davey2010Talk 19:56, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Coolabahapple you're absolutely right. It's not just over-snacking, but super-oversnacking. Seasons's greetings to you and family. Merry Christmas. Love, Lourdes 12:13, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

	Merry Christmas Lourdes
	Hi Lourdes, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and prosperous New Year, Thanks for all your contributions to Wikipedia this past year, like this tree, you are a light shining in the darkness. Onel5969 TT me 12:07, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Onel5969, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Love, Lourdes 12:50, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

🔔🎁⛄️🎅🏻 Atsme 💬 📧 14:06, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

😘 Thank you Atsme. Love, Lourdes 16:56, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Lourdes! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:57, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove and leave other users this message by adding {{subst:Multi-language Season's Greetings}}

Cap R, thank you. Wishes to your family too. Merry Christmas. Lourdes 18:03, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Thinking of you and hoping 2021 brings you all good things! Warm wishes, Innisfree987 (talk) 17:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Innisfree987. Happy new year and lots of love. Lourdes 10:39, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Guideline and policy news

• Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.

Technical news

• You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.

Arbitration

• By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes). The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason).
• Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.

---

I would like to follow up on the admin board report regarding IP:91.237.86.201, I noticed the issue still is pending and sanctions have not taken against the IP, who despite being report continues to edit the article. The edits are highly misleading, and the statements are a combination of syntheses (leading to exaggerated claims) and undue weight. I understand the admins do not get involved in content disputed, but at this point the IP has also used curse words and leveled personal attacks against me, calling me a "lier" twice on the admin board page no less. Yet, despite this the IP was still not sectioned and continues to freely edit the article seeing that no one is paying attention. Also, user AstraLeap, who reported me, does not seem to be bothered that IP has just returned back to the article and is editing away despite being warned over restoring disputed content. I would ask that the IP is blocked, so that Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle is followed, and a meaningfull discussion is allowed to take place that can assess the accuracy of the statements vs. what the sources actually say, this cannot take place when IP is still editing and the questionable claims are left in place as a starting point. --E-960 (talk) 06:56, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

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

Arbitration

• The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people, replacing the 1932 cutoff.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2021 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2021, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2021, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• Wikipedia has now been around for 20 years, and recently saw its billionth edit!

---

You and I were conferring a little more than a year ago about nominating me for admin, and then something distracted one or the other of us. Then I saw that you were editing intermittently, and was concerned that you either were busy in regular real life or were having health problems. Well, I am ready to try to go for admin again. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:37, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

w00t! –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 22:39, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Ditto! Innisfree987 (talk) 22:55, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

• Robert McClenon, this is wonderful. Let's go ahead. Can you please share the answers to the mandatory questions on my email? Let's take it from there. Warmly, Lourdes 07:29, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

I am not sure where the email is. Can you please resend it? I am not in any hurry. (Neither is the .eco dispute.) Robert McClenon (talk) 17:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Robert, I meant that you can start by preparing a draft for the answers to the mandatory RfA questions and then share those with me on my email. Feel free to ask me for any further clarification. Looking forward to getting this through. Lourdes 03:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:11, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Earlier today I noted User:GiantCheeseBall as a potential additional sock in this SPI regarding User:Doubledoppler. I note that you blocked GiantCheeseBall shortly afterwards, as a sock, and that you subsequently engaged at this AN/3 that they had raised and in which Doubledoppler was also mentioned. I'm wondering if you're knowledge could be brought to bear on the SPI. Do you have information as to who GCB is a sock of and is DD one of the identities? Mutt Lunker (talk) 21:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

TJMSmith

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

Interface administrator changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

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

Technical news

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

Arbitration

• By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people. Sanctions issued under GamerGate are now considered Gender and sexuality sanctions.
• The Kurds and Kurdistan case was closed, authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2021 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AmandaNP, Operator873, Stanglavine, Teles, and Wiki13.

---

Evidently you had my RFA draft watchlisted. I will try to revise as you suggest.

As to the RFA, there were two RFAs. The first was in 2006, and I do not mention it, and I am ready if asked to say that it was a case of WP:TOOSOON. The second was in 2017. The community did wind up being wrong, and I will try to find some way to say nothing, probably that there seemed to be some misunderstanding. I can also say that I think that the views of the community on undisclosed paid editing have evolved so that they are more consistent with what have been my views.

More in the near future. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:52, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Noted with thanks Robert. Let me see the second RfA too. Thanks, Lourdes 11:26, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Lourdes, I am hoping you will reevaluate the accuracy of this statement: “Editors like Colin were claiming that readers would want to know more about fringe medical solutions, and therefore that Wikipedia articles should report these, even if MEDRS were unavailable to Wikipedia's standards.” Not only did Colin not do that in that discussion; Colin would never do that (claim that we should add content based on non-MEDRS statements). I fear that in the best interests of everyone, including WP:MED, Colin and RexxS, it would be helpful not to introduce inaccuracies that may lead others to feel they must become involved in this case to defend themselves. Perhaps you can look at what Colin was actually saying there and find a way to re-phrase that statement? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:06, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Sandy, I have removed Colin's name and instead linked his comment. My apologies if the structure sounds off. I'll try and improve it in a few hours. Love, Lourdes

Thanks, Lourdes ... most appreciated, in the interest of not having the issues balloon. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:25, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry to further exercise this, but I am puzzled by your statement "that one normally blocks a bot first only if it is running automatically." I don't see support for that position at WP:BOTBLOCK, and tend to feel, with many of those who commented at the time, that blocking CitationBot would have been the preferable remedy for that situation. I've never blocked a bot, so it's certainly possible that I'm not au fait with policy, guideline and custom on the subject; where should I look to find a basis for this? Choess (talk) 03:22, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Choess. I guess this is the first time we are interacting. Please see WP:BOTUSE: "The use of approved bots in ways outside their approved conditions of operation, is prohibited and may in some cases lead to blocking of the user account and possible sanctions for the operator." Warmly, Lourdes 15:24, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

I was simply going to hit the 'thanks' button, but I realised it would not be enough. What you have said here is IMO the only professional, in depth, and accurate summary in the whole case. I can't say too much, and certainly not on the case pages, because there are some people who since my desysoping are stalking my edits in order to parse them into perceived personal attacks. Cherry-picking and deliberately taking things out of context is a classic game on Wikipedia, and I see this happening here too. So too, the people who deliberately confuse a standard or friendly warning from an admin and call them 'threats' or PA. I was once a dedicated and busy editor and investigative admin, but nowadays the only things I can safely do are correct the occasional typo or add a source when I am looking something up on the encyclopedia or make a short comment on a RfC (and even that can entrain oblique negative comment from others) - once desysoped, one becomes freiwild. A desysoping for someone like RexxS would not be simply the loss of a 'no big deal' set of tools, but also the characteristic character assassination that goes with it for someone who does so much important outreach work. He is one of the nicest people in this minefield of wannabe Wikipolice and you have done your best to prevent that from happening. You can't say more without taking flak yourself for defending him, and I just hope that the Committee for once will read it and take note of it rather than simply reading a numerical consensus of people's schadenfreude in the hope of seeing yet another admin desysoped. So a very big thank you! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:46, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Kudpung. How are you doing? Hope all is good in real life. Thank you for the very kind words above. I understand what you are saying. Warmly, Lourdes 15:02, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Since I semi retired from this circus, I certainly have more time to play the piano, watch some good documentaries and movies, and spend more time with my family. At my age it's what I ought to be doing anyway. Life is too short to waste it on the nasty side of Wikipedia! Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:53, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

I would suggest not stopping the proceedings. Let's go ahead and get the Arbcom decision. That will help RexxS decide on his return with a much clearer perspective and no sword hanging over his head. It would certainly be interesting to see if they would use my case as a precedent or if they have learned anything from the behaviour of their predecessors. It would be nice to see him come back but knowing him as I do, and if Bishonen is right, I'm not holding my breath. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:23, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

True Kudpung. Agree. Lourdes 02:12, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, sorry to bother you but can you please remove the edit summary of this edit? Thank you. --Ashleyyoursmile! 14:23, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out Ashley. It's done. Lourdes 15:08, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for taking care of it and also for leaving this message. --Ashleyyoursmile! 15:54, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

The Arbitration Committee has asked that analysis be kept to around 500 words. Your analysis is over 2,200 words. Please edit your section to focus on the most relevant analysis. If you wish to submit over-length analysis, you must first obtain the agreement of the arbitrators by posting a request on the /Evidence talk page. I understand that this is late in the day, but if you could shorten before the deadline that would be appreciated. Concise analysis is more useful for the committee in making its decision. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 20:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

In light of the short notice that has been given, you will be allowed to edit the evidence page for 24 hours past the time the phase closes to only trim your analysis section. Please only trim or remove what you have already written after the phase closes, and therefore not add further analysis. Once you are under the word limit, you can then leave the analysis as is. If you are still significantly above the limit of 500 words in around 24 hours, your analysis may be trimmed to the limit for you. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 23:30, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey Dreamy Jazz, how have you been dude! I can still remember the song I wrote for you :D Listen, now about the trimming, I am so deep into RL issues. I have a book I have to promote, and other issues. I don't think I can spend time to trim the evidence. You know what, any clerk (not you! they will go screaming to the cleaners of coi) or arb or any uninvolved editor can edit my evidence in whichever way they want. I am sorry, I should be cleaning up my own stuff. But like I said, I should have been given at least 3-4 days. My apologies again. And dude, keep in touch. Love to see you around. Lourdes 03:33, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I've been doing well. How have you been? I hope the book promotion is going well. I still remember the song, it was very good and kind of you.

Thanks for your response when you have been busy IRL. If trimming is authorised by an arb after the 24 hours is up another clerk will likely trim. No worries on not being able to trim. 24 hours is not a long time and we should have really given you more notice, but we don't have time travel (yet).

I will do. It's also good to see you around too. Happy editing and mopping, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 09:23, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Just to keep you in the loop, SQL trimmed your analysis early this morning (UTC time). Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 18:05, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm ready for another once-over of my RFA page. I will look for cases where the Arbs have commented on a statement that I made. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:08, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Excellent. Let me go through this. Warmly, Lourdes 02:18, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

I have removed the former comments. I have taken out a lot of the previous stuff. I'm ready for it to be reviewed. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:56, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Then my review will be done today too. Thank you Robert. I look forward eagerly. Lourdes 03:11, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Robert McClenon hello. Update that I'll be on this today and revert. Warmly, Lourdes 00:47, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Just a heads-up that Barkeep is a different editor and not me. You're certainly not the first to mix us up but I thought it worth a comment for future use. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 04:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Crazy :) Thanks. Lourdes 04:04, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Lourdes. Sorry to bother you during these troubled times, but I did want to mention one thing. I've known 28bytes for a long long time on wiki, and I think perhaps you may misunderstand his intent. Linking to the Streisand effect was just a way of hinting that the more talk there is, the longer a thread gets, then the more people are going to become aware of the information. I consider 28bytes to be one of the most honorable people on wiki and view him as having the utmost integrity. He's also extremely compassionate, and cares about people. I very seriously doubt there was any attempt to be dismissive of your concerns or anything even remotely like that. Iff you feel that "well the cat's out of the bag now", and simply want to ensure this doesn't happen again, I understand that. I read his post as a "people are starting to notice" thing rather than trying to stop you from voicing your concerns. I honestly do wish you the very best, with this, and with all things both on and off wiki. — Ched (talk) 04:47, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Ched. Noted (and apologies posted on the said page). Thanks for being there and nudging me the right way. Lourdes 12:58, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

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

Technical news

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

Arbitration

• A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.

---

Barkeep49 (talk) 11:34, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

This must be a difficult and unpleasant period for you, Lourdes. May I suggest you take a few days break from wiki? I hope that it will be beneficial. Take care.

starship.paint (exalt) 11:40, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

​Thank you :) Lourdes 13:35, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
• The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. Consensus was found in a previous RfC for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus.

Technical news

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

Arbitration

• The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.

---

I see you participate in this discussion. You may want to comment at Talk:Southern Methodist University#Image gallery of former students. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:54, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

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

Administrator changes

Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless

Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

• Consensus was reached to deprecate Wikipedia:Editor assistance.
• Following a Request for Comment the Book namespace was deprecated.

Technical news

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

Arbitration

• After a Clarification request, the Arbitration Committee modified Remedy 5 of the Antisemitism in Poland case. This means sourcing expectations are a discretionary sanction instead of being present on all articles. It also details using the talk page or the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to discuss disputed sources.

---

Precious

Five years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:48, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

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

Guideline and policy news

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

Technical news

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

Arbitration

• The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.

---

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

Guideline and policy news

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

Technical news

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

Arbitration

• Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions.

Miscellaneous

• You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.

---

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

Administrator changes

Jake Wartenberg

Emperor • Viridian Bovary

Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

• Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
• A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
• A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
• A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.

Technical news

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

Arbitration

• A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.

Miscellaneous

• The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.

---

Hi! Reply-link has officially been superseded by mw:DiscussionTools, which you can install using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features. DiscussionTools, developed by the WMF's Editing Team, is faster and has more features than reply-link, and it wouldn't make sense for me to keep developing reply-link. I think the Editing Team is doing amazing work, and look forward to what they can do in the future. Thank you for using reply-link over the years! Enterprisey (talk!) 06:11, 6 September 2021 (UTC)