User talk:Holly Cheng/Archive20

Hi. Thanks again for your help with Shavuot. I do have a question and comment, though.

Having just come back from being offline during the holiday, I notice that apparently, several of you decided that the sources we provided were "not good enough", dumped Shavuot back into not-eligible, and it didn't end up making it in until Thursday, the second day of the holiday.^[1] Now, I will concede that the sources I found were not the very best. I tried to find some sources that were reasonably reliable so that I could quickly repair the article in time for the holiday, and found what I could quickly. But I—and many others who watch those pages—are religiously observant, and once the holiday actually begins, we're really in no position to do anything whatsoever about peoples' objections.

So there are two related but not identical questions here:

• What do we do about people (not you) who are really anal (pardon me) about somehow defending the purity of Wikipedia, or at least its main page? We have often found that sources that WikiProject Judaism finds entirely appropriate get knocked down (at main page or GA) by people who know nothing about Judaism or Jewish sources.
• As much as that one user was objecting to me that Main Page followers owe absolutely no help to us to watch our own pages, the truth is that once the holiday actually starts, we're really in no position to help ourselves, and are potentially vulnerable to people making decisions that we cannot then correct. In the case of Shavuot, for example, if we would list the holiday on May 31 (UTC), the holiday would have already started roughly seven hours earlier in Israel, five hours earlier in Britain, and just about exactly at midnight UTC on the Atlantic coast of North America. And even here in the Eastern US I was offline and preparing for the holiday by the time you put Shavuot back in the "ineligible" category. Unless someone on the US West Coast or in Hawaii is watching, we're out of luck. We tried in good faith to try to fix things, and the source was certainly not a terrible one for a C-class article like Shavuot.

So my commitment to you and the Main Page team is this: As much as incidents like this really frustrate me about working on English Wikipedia, I'll try to work to get every major holiday page at least to B-level, and I'll try to make sure we're in good shape a week before the holiday at minimum. At the same time, please AGF on our part, and please assume that any source that isn't an outright blog is provisionally acceptable. (For example, My Jewish Learning is an editorially-controlled website, not a blog shop. I've never seen anything in it that doesn't have some grounding in acceptable sources, even when those aren't made explicit on the web site.) I'm hoping that by being ready a week ahead of time, we won't have troubles like these, whether we end up listing holidays on the eve or the day of the holiday. But then we need some good faith from the Main Page people that once we get within twelve hours of the holiday UTC, when we are starting to drop offline to prepare for the holiday, you will not start going funky on us.

Thanks for listening. I'd appreciate your comments. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:43, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

@StevenJ81: I can safely say that in almost all cases, nobody is really attempting to assess the quality of the sources. Mostly we make sure that the references are sufficient, and make sure the blurb text aligns with what the article says. I think in this case all this stuff was done at the last minute, so that's why there were more eyes on it than usual. As WP Judaism appears to be a fairly active project, as long as you folks stay on top of the articles, I don't anticipate any further problems. —howcheng {chat} 16:40, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:43, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

I added the citation, I think this is the only maintenance tag. This was originally added by AndreasPhilopter, but he removed it accidentally in the course of good faith revisions to the lede. I restored essentially the same statement with more formal language and added the citation. Given his last comment on the talk, I think the content dispute has pretty much fizzled . For these reasons, I think Pentecost should be included for OTD. Seraphim System ^(talk) 10:34, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

1982 Iranian diplomats kidnapping has never appeared in WP:OTD before and I though it would be priored this year as we have its 35th anniversary this year. Could I know why it was missed? --Mhhossein ^talk 05:08, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

@Mhhossein: The article says that took place on July 4. —howcheng {chat} 02:05, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Oops! --Mhhossein ^talk 07:36, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Howcheng. --Mhhossein ^talk 14:12, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Howard. Just a friendly reminder to protect a Commons image before transcluding it in a template appearing on the main page currently or very soon. (I realize that this rarely applies to your edits.) Thanks! —David Levy 06:14, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

The bot got it quickly today. I went to go protect it and it was already done. —howcheng {chat} 07:37, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi. I have addressed the tags on Gwendolyn Brooks. Thanks. Alanscottwalker (talk) 00:06, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

I made the changes because, I wished to emphasise that you could easily have read the other articles and made those changes, which is something that WP:V encourages.

You asked about "Battle of Quatre Bras#Aftermath as well". It is a work in progress see s:User:PBS/sandbox2 (for some primary sources) and user: PBS/sandbox for a large expansion based on one of the well known PD sources. -- PBS (talk) 22:00, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

@PBS: Great, thanks. —howcheng {chat} 17:36, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).

Administrator changes

Happyme22 • Dragons flight

Zad68

Guideline and policy news

• The RFC discussion regarding WP:OUTING and WMF essay about paid editing and outing (see more at the ArbCom noticeboard archives) is now archived. Milieus #3 and #4 received support; so did concrete proposal #1.

Technical news

• Fuzzy search will soon be added to Special:Undelete, allowing administrators to search for deleted page titles with results similar to the search query. You can test this by adding ?fuzzy=1 to the URL, as with Special:Undelete?fuzzy=1. Currently the search only finds pages that exactly match the search term.
• A new bot will automatically revision delete unused file versions from files in Category:Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old.

Miscellaneous

• A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
• A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
• Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.

Hi there! WP:PROD is now applicable to files. Could you add a prod option to your image script? Thanks! Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:41, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

OK, I will get on this soon. —howcheng {chat} 08:18, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I was wondering if there's a size criteria for the article to be eligible for the OTD box. Can you help me with this? Thanks! Saff V. (talk) 06:39, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

In general, longer articles are preferred to shorter articles. But in this case, because the UN makes so many resolutions, if one is to appear it should be an important one. —howcheng {chat} 07:28, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your complete explanation, but is there any exact size? I don't know such as (9001 B (1457 words)! Saff V. (talk) 07:15, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

No. If there are very few articles available for a day, I may use a short article, but if there are many, then a short article will not get used. It really depends. —howcheng {chat} 08:17, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

It's right and actually interesting!Saff V. (talk) 10:39, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Re: July 2017 section cite tag. Can you be more specific on where you feel citations are needed? WCCasey (talk) 04:45, 13 July 2017 (UTC) @WCCasey: I left a note with the tag. There are no citations in the three middle paragraphs. —howcheng {chat} 07:03, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I read the note, but to me that's not automatically a problem. I count 12 wikilinks in those 3 short paragraphs - to other articles that have sourcing. I don't see anything controversial in those paragraphs that needs a citation. If you can be more specific about your concerns, I will try to find find sources. Thanks WCCasey (talk) 00:13, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Just a heads up that there was a discussion a while back on selected anniversaries about whether to include "begins at night" or the "main day" of observance. The net discussion was that we should use the main day, so for example Tisha B'Av, which starts the night of July 31, should not be on the page, but it should be on August 1st as the main part of the observance. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 18:06, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

@Sir Joseph: OK thanks, I'd forgotten. —howcheng {chat} 02:22, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2017).

Administrator changes

Anarchyte • GeneralizationsAreBad • Cullen328 ^{(first RfA to reach WP:300)}

Cprompt • Rockpocket • Rambo's Revenge • Animum • TexasAndroid • Chuck SMITH • MikeLynch • Crazytales • Ad Orientem

Guideline and policy news

• Following a series of discussions around new pages patrol, the WMF is helping implement a controlled autoconfirmed article creation trial as a research experiment, similar to the one proposed in 2011. You can learn more about the research plan at meta:Research:Autoconfirmed article creation trial. The exact start date of the experiment has yet to be determined.
• A new speedy deletion criterion, regarding articles created as a result undisclosed paid editing, is currently being discussed (permalink).
• An RfC (permalink) is currently open that proposes expanding WP:G13 to include all drafts, even if they weren't submitted through Articles for Creation.

Technical news

• LoginNotify should soon be deployed to the English Wikipedia. This will notify users when there are suspicious login attempts on their account.
• The new version of XTools is nearing an official release. This suite of tools includes administrator statistics, an improved edit counter, among other tools that may benefit administrators. You can report issues on Phabricator and provide general feedback at mw:Talk:XTools.

Hi,

I hope this message finds you having a good day.

My name is Jacob Grossfeld and I am the managing editor for Zumic, a music news website.

I'm writing to you because we discovered your photo of Devendra Banhart (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:DevendraBanhart.jpg) online with a Creative Commons license, and we would appreciate your written permission to use it on our website, as well as your preferred attribution credit and any other specifications you might require.

A little background about Zumic: We cover all styles of music, giving artists and fans the respect they deserve. The name Zumic comes from our goal of "Music that revolves around you." Our philosophy champions a true appreciation for musicianship. We celebrate artists and make their work more accessible to people who will enjoy it. We truly believe that music has the power to educate, heal, and bring people together.

If you would like to request more information about Zumic, please do not hesitate to inquire.

Best regards, Jacob Grossfeld jacob (at) zumic.com Jgrossfeld2 (talk) 20:52, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

@Jgrossfeld2: I did not take the photo in question. I merely uploaded it on behalf of the actual photographer, Lauren Dukoff. That being said, you do not actually need permission to use it because it's licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. In short, you are free to use the photo for whatever purpose you wish, as long as you give credit to the creator. Good luck with your project. —howcheng {chat} 21:41, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I beg to inform you that Cinema Rex fire had been edited to nominate for WP:OTD . Finally it was moved to the main part at nomination OTD page.Saff V. (talk) 06:54, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

@Saff V.: OK, I will probably save it for next year's 40th anniversary. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 07:31, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2017).

Administrator changes

Nakon • Scott

Sverdrup • Thespian • Elockid • James086 • Ffirehorse • Celestianpower • Boing! said Zebedee

Guideline and policy news

• ACTRIAL, a research experiment that restricts article creation to autoconfirmed users, will begin on September 7. It will run for six months. You can learn more about the research specifics at meta:Research:Autoconfirmed article creation trial, while Wikipedia talk:Autoconfirmed article creation trial is probably the best venue for general discussion.
• Following an RfC, WP:G13 speedy deletion criterion now applies to any page in the draftspace that has not been edited in six months. There is a bot-generated report, updated daily, to help identify potentially qualifying drafts that have not been submitted through articles for creation.

Technical news

• You will now get a notification when someone tries to log in to your account and fails. If they try from a device that has logged into your account before, you will be notified after five failed attempts. You can also set in your preferences to get an email when someone logs in to your account from a new device or IP address, which may be encouraged for admins and accounts with sensitive permissions.
• Syntax highlighting is now available as a beta feature (more info). This may assist administrators and template editors when dealing with intricate syntax of high-risk templates and system messages.
• In your notification preferences, you can now block specific users from pinging you. This functionality will soon be available for Special:EmailUser as well.

Arbitration

• Applications for CheckUser and Oversight are being accepted by the Arbitration Committee until September 12. Community discussion of the candidates will begin on September 18.

Did you notice my message? Thanks. --Mhhossein ^talk 18:13, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Updated! :) Wwwhatsup (talk) 07:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for creating Mycoremediation, Howcheng!

Wikipedia editor Insertcleverphrasehere just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

A good candidate to take to WP:DYK.

To reply, leave a comment on Insertcleverphrasehere's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

— Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 23:18, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2017).

Administrator changes

Boing! said Zebedee • Ansh666 • Ad Orientem

Tonywalton • AmiDaniel • Silence • BanyanTree • Magioladitis • Vanamonde93 • Mr.Z-man • Jdavidb • Jakec • Ram-Man • Yelyos • Kurt Shaped Box

Guideline and policy news

• Following a successful proposal to create it, a new user right called "edit filter helper" is now assignable and revocable by administrators. The right allows non-administrators to view the details of private edit filters, but not to edit them.
• Following a discussion about mass-application of ECP and how the need for logging and other details of an evolving consensus may have been missed by some administrators, a rough guide to extended confirmed protection has been written. This information page describes how the extended-confirmed aspects of the protection policy are currently being applied by administrators.

Technical news

• You can now search for IP ranges at Special:Contributions. Some log pages and Special:DeletedContributions are not yet supported. Wildcards (e.g. 192.168.0.*) are also not supported, but the popular contribsrange gadget will continue to work.

Arbitration

• Community consultation on the 2017 candidates for CheckUser and Oversight has concluded. The Arbitration Committee will appoint successful candidates by October 11.
• A request for comment is open regarding the structure, rules, and procedures of the December 2017 Arbitration Committee election, and how to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2017).

Administrator changes

Longhair • Megalibrarygirl • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93

Allen3 • Eluchil404 • Arthur Rubin • Bencherlite

Technical news

• The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team is creating an "Interaction Timeline" tool that intends to assist administrators in resolving user conduct disputes. Feedback on the concept may be posted on the talk page.
• A new function is now available to edit filter managers that will make it easier to look for multiple strings containing spoofed text.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors will be invited to submit candidate statements for the 2017 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 12 until November 21. Voting will begin on November 27 and last until December 10.
• Following a request for comment, Ritchie333, Yunshui and Ymblanter will serve as the Electoral Commission for the 2017 ArbCom Elections.

Obituaries

• The Wikipedia community has recently learned that Allen3 (William Allen Peckham) passed away on December 30, 2016, the same day as JohnCD. Allen began editing in 2005 and became an administrator that same year.

Template:POTD image/2007-02-03 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 17:51, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Why have you removed the tram image? I'm not seeing two train images in a row on 8/9 or 9/10 Nov. Please restore it. Mjroots (talk) 22:41, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

@Mjroots: OK, it wasn't two in a row, but there were trains on November 4 and November 7, so that would be three in less a week. —howcheng {chat} 02:39, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Adding CN tags and section clean-up tags. If you've done one, you don;t need the other. I feel as if we've had this discussion before.

Also, please read WP:Tag bombing and WP:Verification. Although every fact on Wikipedia should ideally be supported by a citation, if there's no doubt that the fact is accurate, a citation is not necessary. It's only disputed or controversial information that is required to have a citation. Please give some thought to the fact that an article full of CN tags is much more difficult for the user to read, and consider whether you are, in fact, improving the article by tag bombing it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:54, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

I ask you to consider what you're doing and you go ahead and add more CN tags? No. I've reverted all of your edit as being in violation of WP:Tag bombing. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:02, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Then don't remove my tags. I tagged the entire article with my specific concerns in a comment, and you undid it. If you're so concerned about an article full of {{cn}} tags, then you should have left the damn thing on top. Plus, you're wrong. WP:V says (emphasis mine) All material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation that directly supports the material. My adding the CN tag to the sentence is me making such a challenge. You say "if there's no doubt", which makes no sense. If I'm reading about a topic because I want to learn about it, there's no way for me to discern which claims are true and which are false. Otherwise, you're saying that readers should uncritically accept every sentence lacking a citation as fact. PS: WP:Tag bombing is an essay, whereas WP:V is policy. —howcheng {chat} 03:15, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

It will be the 30th anniversary of the King's Cross Fire on 18 November. Can it be included please? Mjroots (talk) 06:22, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

@Mjroots: Yeah, stick it in. —howcheng {chat} 07:26, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

OK, will do. Mjroots (talk) 07:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Mjroots, that's a nice article, it's not C-class by any means, would you consider taking it to GAN? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:50, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man:, personally, I wouldn't. I've had no input at all to the article. Nothing stopping you doing it though, if you feel it is up to scratch. Mjroots (talk) 07:53, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

I've removed the unreferenced section. Had been unreferenced since added by and IP way back in 2007. Little to no chance of finding original source as company has changed its name since the time of the accident, so I wouldn't even begin to know where to search the Wayback machine. On balance, the deleted info is not that important as most of it is covered elsewhere. Mjroots (talk) 18:59, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I added the needed sources for the article Stanisław August Poniatowski to be in the anniversary section of Wikipedia's main page. Regards. Oliszydlowski, 09:03, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:American Progress - Jose Maria Sert, photo by Jaime Ardiles-Arce.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:20, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2017).

Administrator changes

Joe Roe

JzG

Ericorbit • Perceval • Thingg • Tristanb • Violetriga

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.

Technical news

• Wikimedians are now invited to vote on the proposals in the 2017 Community Wishlist Survey on Meta Wiki until 10 December 2017. In particular, there is a section of the survey regarding new tools for administrators and for anti-harassment.
• A new function is available to edit filter managers which can be used to store matches from regular expressions.

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is open until Sunday 23:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC). There are 12 candidates running for 8 vacant seats.

Miscellaneous

• Over the last few months, several users have reported backlogs that require administrator attention at WP:ANI, with the most common backlogs showing up on WP:SPI, WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
• The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative is conducting a survey for English Wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.

Hi, just an FYI, I added Chanukah to Dec 13 as first day of Chanukah. I posted an FYI to the Wikiproject so we can see if we can clean it up. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 15:17, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

1. You and he both violated BRD. 2. It makes no difference if "he helps you out" you and he don't own this. 3. It makes no sense to remove something this far out when items can be improved, especially when listed. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 16:59, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

@Sir Joseph: If you want to keep Hanukkah in, then just move that one back by itself; next time don't undo the rest of the edit, please. (I'm in the middle of doing the update for this year, so I'll put it back in for you.) Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 17:05, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I also put a notice on the project page, and FTR, many of the CN tags are overdone and not needed. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 17:14, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

• Dear Howcheng, there's an ongoing discussion on the recent issues in the article. Among other points, one of the major objections raised by those objecting the taggings, is that why the article was tagged just before appearing on the main page. There have been some back forth on the article TP and I think your comment can be clarifying. Thanks. --Mhhossein ^talk 12:32, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Harrowsmith Country Life cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:24, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I have added two sources for confirmation of Pernilla Wahlgrens birthday. And I can add many more if needed. Are there a chance of adding her again to the OTD section, or will it have to wait until 2018. Its just that it is her 50th birthday this year. Anyway Merry Christmas.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:36, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

@BabbaQ: Sorry, was offline most yesterday. A little too late now. —howcheng {chat} 19:56, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Totally understand. I have beem busy all day as well. --BabbaQ (talk) 00:25, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing—Tarako (food)—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Gidiyorum (talk) 09:45, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

did you check the sixth paragraph, all those paragraphs can easily run together, and aren't going to be individually itemised Dave Rave (talk) 00:49, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

@Dave Rave: The next paragraph has two citations to offline sources. Not sure how I'm supposed to check those two. —howcheng {chat} 00:52, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

linked some books, some show online Dave Rave (talk) 11:47, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

@Dave Rave: I'm sorry, but I'm not going to have time to do that research. —howcheng {chat} 02:09, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Re Reagan's career (OTD, Jan. 2), my mistake -- somehow I misread/mis-remembered "career in government" as "political career." Sorry. Sca (talk) 16:08, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017).

Administrator changes

Muboshgu

Anetode • Laser brain • Worm That Turned

None

Bureaucrat changes

Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news

• The 2017 Community Wishlist Survey results have been posted. The Community Tech team will investigate and address the top ten results.
• The Anti-Harassment Tools team is inviting comments on new blocking tools and improvements to existing blocking tools for development in early 2018. Feedback can be left on the discussion page or by email.

Arbitration

• Following the results of the 2017 election, the following editors have been (re)appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Alex Shih, BU Rob13, Callanecc, KrakatoaKatie, Opabinia regalis, Premeditated Chaos, RickinBaltimore, Worm That Turned.

You're probably not aware but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. The article about the person you added to January 28 did not have any source to back up your addition has been reverted. Please do not restore it without providing a direct reliable source. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 18:46, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

@Toddst1: Do you mean the date has to be cited in the subject's article (it is) or on the DOY page (I don't see any citations on the page at all)? Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 08:14, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

No, none of it is referenced, it would seem, however, that only new items require references as nothing is being done about all the existing entries. What this actually means is that every single day of the year article should be tagged with {{ref improve}}. (And these are linked from the main page....!) There was no clear consensus during that discussion in any case. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:20, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

I think the Rambling Man's response is unfortunate suggesting the sky is falling. The goal here is to incrementally raise the bar on these notoriously low-quality pages and ensure they are verifiable. As they stand, almost none of these entries are sourced and I routinely find errors. The discussion came down to a common sense elimination of the project's self-declared exemption from WP:V. Toddst1 (talk) 15:47, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

My question remains unanswered, but I'm sensing that the goal is to have the inline citations on the DOY pages themselves. Is that correct? —howcheng {chat} 17:09, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

The answer to your question is pretty clear, this apparent consensus now demands that every item in every "day of the year" list is referenced. So that's 366 {{ref improve}} tags that need to be added. The sky is not "falling", we just have 366 articles which are very inadequately referenced according to a consensus which was by no means clear. So tag we must to get others to join in with the referencing, regardless of the fact these articles are bold-linked from the main page. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:30, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Of course, having said that, this is only a mere essay and can be summarily ignored for the purpose of good sense, so I'd suggest we keep adding items whose articles contain sufficient referencing. There's no mandate to follow an "essay" by any means. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:35, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: Deliberately ignoring the essay which as you say reflects consensus would be disruptive by definition. If you have any doubt, read WP:DISRUPTSIGNS #1, #5 and maybe a few others. Toddst1 (talk) 01:30, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Not really. If it was even a guideline, there'd be scope for sensible editing, e.g. precisely not what you've recently done and arbitrarily remove one new item because it was unreferenced, versus the literally hundreds of items in the same article which are also unreferenced. That's not helpful at all, in fact, some of us would consider that highly disruptive. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:52, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

So you've unilaterally decided that your actions are sensible, yet they fly in the face of the community-set guideline. Right. I'm done here. Toddst1 (talk) 15:24, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

I've also decided that your edit to remove that one entry added by Howcheng was purely disruptive, in order to prove a point, and didn't help Wikipedia or our readers in any way. Goodbye!! The Rambling Man (talk) 15:27, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, the goal is to have references on the DOY pages. Toddst1 (talk) 19:13, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

It's not very difficult. You should try it. Without references we have problems like this. Thanks for fixing it. Toddst1 (talk) 15:33, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Ok, you need to stop this now. Get a source. Toddst1 (talk) 21:17, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Toddst1: Seriously, it's extremely rude to treat me like a newbie. WP:DOY doesn't say anything about this yet, and it's still only an essay on WP:DAYS. Have you even added {{reflist}} to each page yet? —howcheng {chat} 21:24, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Howcheng, It's rude for someone - especially an admin - to think that WP:BURDEN doesn't apply to them. If you were a newbie, you'd be getting im-4 level warnings at this point. You're basically ignoring this conversation and your wingman isn't helping.

So you think it's my job to add {{reflist}} sections to each article? Not hardly - see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Days_of_the_year#Task_list. Get off your high horse and contribute more constructively. Even an admin can be blocked for continuing to add unsourced crap like you're doing. Toddst1 (talk) 21:41, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

"... add unsourced crap ..." really? I think you're becoming too involved now, step away before you get blocked for WP:NPA. By the way, "Ok, consider this a final warning". Ditto. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:48, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Dude, let's chill a bit here. We're all on the same team, aren't we? If you look at my contributions, you'll see I've been adding references to articles left and right, so please don't lecture me about being constructive. My main question is, if this is a position that has been adopted by WP:DAYS, then why is there no mention of this on WP:DOY, which is the guideline covering all DOY pages? Because that's what I'm following. And seriously, please AGF as well. Again, if you look at my contributions, you can see that mostly I'm just moving things when I find them listed on the wrong page. —howcheng {chat} 21:57, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Toddst1:, you're becoming extremely disruptive. Attempting to drag me to Arbcom (!!!) just on the back of our recent disagreement, yet relating to completely different was particularly wasteful, but at least I know now you are watching my talkpage! You need to start working with us, not against us. If you want to follow an essay, feel free, but until it becomes policy, quit giving us regulars such an unhelpful migraine. While you're adding {{reflist}} to each page, be sure to add {{ref improve}} as well, because, according to your new approach, it would certainly be needed in each and every case. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:31, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

To be clear, I am not at all opposed to having citations on the DOY pages, if that is indeed the direction we want to go in, but I'm not about to start if this is just a one-man crusade. —howcheng {chat} 21:39, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

WP:BURDEN and WP:V is not a one-man crusade. It's policy. You might try reading it since you're charged with enforcing it - even on yourself. Toddst1 (talk) 21:43, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

This recent fad certainly is a one-person crusade. And the way it's being implemented is unhelpful. Please be sure to tag all articles with the right templates if you actually believe that BURDEN and V now suddenly apply to these articles, that way they'll get some attention since we won't be able to link any of them from the main page. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:46, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Technically, even though the DOY pages are bold on OTD, they don't count as being "featured" as making an appearance on the Main Page (AnomieBOT doesn't touch their talk pages to indicate they were listed that day). —howcheng {chat} 21:57, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

But the "today" article is in bold, so ought not (must not) be maintenance tagged. Certainly that's the case with all other aspects of the main page at the point of posting. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:00, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

That rule is supposed to apply to the blurbs themselves, not the DOY page. I suppose that's not very clear. —howcheng {chat} 22:03, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Well, as I said, the "no maintenance tags" applies to every bold link on the main page at the point of posting right now. Once we tag every single DOY article, that should render the link non-bold for the "SHAME" of lack of refs. Mind you, I can't say I've seen or heard even once of any of our readers concerned with the lack of inline sources in these articles. And that includes a few years working on OTRS where everything was complained about. Storm in a teacup. I guess it will pass, a new fad will come by and we can just continue as we were. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:07, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

So we just de-bold the day, I suppose. No big deal. —howcheng {chat} 22:10, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Sure. I guess this new enthusiasm should also apply to simple year articles? I wonder why I'm not seeing the same burst of vim aimed at 2018 for instance, which contains a few dozen deaths, yet not one single citation for any one of them. Funny old world this Wikipedia. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:13, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, if day articles are affected, then naturally year articles would be as well, but those fall under the purview of Wikipedia:WikiProject Years. @Toddst1: as you seem to be the driving force here, would you care to bring this up with them? —howcheng {chat} 22:19, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

It's on my list of things I would like to do. DOY had explicitly exempted themselves from WP:V, so it seemed like the place to start. There are more than a few errors on them as you and Dldnh have discovered. Toddst1 (talk) 22:33, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Perfect, so anyone can anything they like to year articles without invoking the merest glimmer of wrath, but linked articles being added to days of the year articles, that's now a "final warning" kind of thing. Unbelievable. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:38, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi Howcheng, can you look at Jan 23rd's On This Day, there are conflicting sources for Hai Rui's year of birth, could this entry be replaced? I'd do it myself but I don't want to risk picking someone that has been used before. Thanks, fish&karate 11:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Fish and karate We didn't do births and deaths last year so you can replace that one (and the other one without a source) without worrying about repeats. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:24, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Following on from my 'happy birthday Wikipedia' message on the MP talk page last week - is it time to start planning for Wikipedia's 20 years-since-foundation? (The discussion for the Wikipedia (in whatever form it then exists) equivalent of Emma Morano will probably have to wait until "today 2118".) Jackiespeel (talk) 17:47, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi -- I had just put in the anniversary of silent film actress Barbara La Marr's death (in 1926) just days before you removed it -- it had never been featured before, and I think it's worthy. Would you please restore it to the anniversary page? Stolengood (talk) 02:44, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@Stolengood: Sorry, but her filmography is not referenced (I tagged the article accordingly). Plenty of GA-level articles have been taken out for that same reason. —howcheng {chat} 03:35, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

@Howcheng: I can put in a reference quite easily -- I've got the most recent biography of her on-hand; it's got a complete filmography list. The anniversary can be restored once that's done, correct, or is it already transcluded? Stolengood (talk) 03:39, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

And, put in. Done. Stolengood (talk) 03:45, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

OK, I'll put it back in. —howcheng {chat} 03:54, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks. :-) Stolengood (talk) 19:17, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps, instead of slapping a tag on top of the page, you add {{cn}} on those sections you think need verification? Thanks. --evrik ^(talk) 15:53, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

@Evrik: I left a note with the tag... was that not clear enough for you? —howcheng {chat} 16:42, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Whatevs. I imagine that the tag will still be there eight years from now. --evrik ^(talk) 16:54, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Blurpeace • Dana boomer • Deltabeignet • Denelson83 • Grandiose • Salvidrim! • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
• Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.

Technical news

• A tag will now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee has enacted a change to the discretionary sanctions procedure which requires administrators to add a standardized editnotice when placing page restrictions. Editors cannot be sanctioned for violations of page restrictions if this editnotice was not in place at the time of the violation.

Hello, Howcheng. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mussel Slough Tragedy".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Legacypac (talk) 09:04, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I've fixed section with the citation problems that you tagged on the L.S. Lowry article. I assume it has been flagged up for OTD on 23 February. I've also fixed copyvios etc and fixed all other tagged content and removed tags. Richerman (talk) 22:44, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

It was a candidate. I ended up picking something else, but I'll be glad to stick Lowry in the staging area for next year. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 23:23, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@Richerman: The list of works is going to need a citation too. If you have a source that lists most of them, you can by with something like "Source (unless otherwise noted): ..." Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 00:00, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

I made a bit of a cock up. I removed a lot of what I thought was copyvio text but later realised the site I was looking at was taken from the wikipedia article so I had to restore back to an earlier version losing about three hours work. I think I've fixed it all now except the lists of works. If I can't find citations maybe I'll just remove them altogether. Richerman (talk) 00:38, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

OK, I've fixed the list of works now - it's all referenced. Richerman (talk) 10:58, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

You're a hard taskmaster but quite correct of course :-) I've removed the two uncited paragraphs as I can't find any citations for them. Richerman (talk) 18:06, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@Richerman: Nice work, I'll reward you with a Main Page appearance. César Ritz can wait until next year. —howcheng {chat} 18:11, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

I only just noticed the bit about leaving it till next year - you're very kind, makes all the hard work worthwhile. Richerman (talk) 18:18, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).

Administrator changes

Lourdes†

AngelOfSadness • Bhadani • Chris 73 • Coren • Friday • Midom • Mike V

† Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

Guideline and policy news

• The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
• Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
• A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
• A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

Technical news

• CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
• The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2018 Steward elections, the following users are our new stewards: -revi, Green Giant, Rxy, There'sNoTime, علاء.

Obituaries

• Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.

Hi. Thanks for the edit removing the commentary. I was still a newbie when I created the article many years ago, and was still finding my feet... Cheers. Davidelit (Talk) 06:03, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

I have restored your edit. ‑ ‑ Gareth Griffith‑Jones ^{The Welsh Buzzard} ‑ ‑ 18:17, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

I see you have removed the reference to the Sikh New Year on Wikipedia:Selected_anniversaries/March_14. Any way it can be restored?

2601:81:4200:69BE:FD5D:85FD:1990:E24 (talk) 21:37, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

im new and just starting to learn it. feels good to see how wikipedia admin and members like you help many people worldwide thnx a lot 13 March 2018 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mustangcars (talk • contribs) 10:46, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

im sorry im still practicing the codes btw about the nomination how would you know if the picture is accepted ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mustangcars (talk • contribs) 16:18, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

i already post a new pic in WP:Featured picture candidates can u tell me who will be the voters? and if there's a notification if the pic has been approved or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mustangcars (talk • contribs) 17:37, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

@Mustangcars: Sorry, I don't know who will be the voters (actually, it's not really voting, it's more of a consensus-type thing). It's probably going to be most of the same people who are involved with other candidates on that page. The result of the discussion will be posted on that page also. Good luck! —howcheng {chat} 17:39, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

sorry maybe i was just to excited or what but it will never happen again — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mustangcars (talk • contribs) 03:57, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Evergreen Cemetery, Los Angeles, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kenny Washington (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:06, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

how to determine if the picture is already featured last year? and is there easy way to determined if the picture or article is already featured? thnx in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mustangcars (talk • contribs) 06:42, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

@Mustangcars: I'm not totally sure I understand what you're asking. Are you asking if a picture was promoted to Featured Picture status in 2017? Wikipedia:Goings-on shows what happens each week, so you can go through all the listings for 2017 to see the promotions. Any picture that is Featured status will have a little banner on it, like File:Mount Hood reflected in Mirror Lake, Oregon.jpg. Also if you look in the upper right corner, you will see a star icon. Featured articles also have the star icon and the banner is on the article's talk page. Or you asking if a picture was selected for Picture of the Day in 2017? For that, you can look at the POTD archive pages, Wikipedia:Picture of the day/January 2017 and so on. Articles are in the FA archives: Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 2017 and so on. —howcheng {chat} 22:02, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

On 26 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Treaty of Livadia, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the terms of the Treaty of Livadia between Qing China and the Russian Empire were so unfavorable to China that the negotiator Chonghou was sentenced to death? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Treaty of Livadia. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Treaty of Livadia), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Special:Diff/832535830 and Special:Diff/832536121, a different source disagrees. (I could not find the date in the work you cite, using Google Books. Can you provide a direct link to that info?) - dcljr (talk) 19:41, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

@Dcljr: In the Sigismund Báthory#Last years section, it says 13 March and it's cited to an offline source. I did not add that date myself, so I was only harmonizing the lead with the article text (I was acting under the assumption that the date was accurately reflected in the source "Szabó 2012"). If you're sure that the 13th is incorrect, I will trust that you know this topic better than I do. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 20:31, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't know anything about the topic. I just searched for the name and dates in Google Books and found 27 March in a source but couldn't find 13 March. (That doesn't mean it's wrong; I just couldn't verify it.) Note that the date is given as the 27th in the lead sentence, the infobox, and the "succession box" at the bottom of the article (of course, those are not necessarily "independent" attestations), while the 13th date only appears in the "Last years" section — although, granted, apparently sourced. Unfortunately, I could not find that date in that particular source. I am only searching "blindly", so to speak, since I can't see the full text of that work, so I can't be sure it's wrong. Like I said, I have no independent knowledge of any of this. I'll bring this up on the article's talk page. - dcljr (talk) 22:58, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

@Dcljr: It looks like the two of us are both just trying to figure it out based on incomplete information. I agree the article talk page is probably the best bet. —howcheng {chat} 02:37, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

OK, well, the editor who originally added the March 13th date back in 2016 (don't have the exact "diff" to link to) is saying that March 27th is the correct date. Good enough for me. BTW, in my edit summary when I reverted your change, I claimed "27 March date seems to be cited", but that was wrong: as you pointed out, March 13th was the date with a citation. Whatever… [grin] - dcljr (talk) 03:29, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Katherine Jones, Viscountess Ranelagh, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Edward Hyde (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

thnx for the patience and understanding — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mustangcars (talk • contribs) 01:16, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2018).

Administrator changes

331dot • Cordless Larry • ClueBot NG

Gogo Dodo • Pb30 • Sebastiankessel • Seicer • SoLando

Guideline and policy news

• Administrators who have been desysopped due to inactivity are now required to have performed at least one (logged) administrative action in the past 5 years in order to qualify for a resysop without going through a new RfA.
• Editors who have been found to have engaged in sockpuppetry on at least two occasions after an initial indefinite block, for whatever reason, are now automatically considered banned by the community without the need to start a ban discussion.
• The notability guideline for organizations and companies has been substantially rewritten following the closure of this request for comment. Among the changes, the guideline more clearly defines the sourcing requirements needed for organizations and companies to be considered notable.
• The six-month autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) ended on 14 March 2018. The post-trial research report has been published. A request for comment is now underway to determine whether the restrictions from ACTRIAL should be implemented permanently.

Technical news

• There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee is considering a change to the discretionary sanctions procedures which would require an editor to appeal a sanction to the community at WP:AE or WP:AN prior to appealing directly to the Arbitration Committee at WP:ARCA.

Miscellaneous

• A discussion has closed which concluded that administrators are not required to enable email, though many editors suggested doing so as a matter of best practice.
• The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team has released the Interaction Timeline. This shows a chronologic history for two users on pages where they have both made edits, which may be helpful in identifying sockpuppetry and investigating editing disputes.

I removed a death anniversary because the date doesn't match the article. Art LaPella (talk) 03:26, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Denis O'Brien, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rugby (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:37, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Hey! Thank you for suggesting that the page Main Building (University of Notre Dame) be improved. I added all the appropriate citations and overall improved the page. Is it possible to reinsert it in the selected anniversaries? It has not been featured yet, and the page has undergone a lot of improvements. Thank you! Eccekevin (talk) 03:59, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Why don't we hold it for next year, when it's a nice round-number 120th anniversary? —howcheng {chat} 07:30, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Chochopk • Coffee • Gryffindor • Jimp • Knowledge Seeker • Lankiveil • Peridon • Rjd0060

Guideline and policy news

• The ability to create articles directly in mainspace is now indefinitely restricted to autoconfirmed users.
• A proposal is being discussed which would create a new "event coordinator" right that would allow users to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit.

Technical news

• AbuseFilter has received numerous improvements, including an OOUI overhaul, syntax highlighting, ability to search existing filters, and a few new functions. In particular, the search feature can be used to ensure there aren't existing filters for what you need, and the new equals_to_any function can be used when checking multiple namespaces. One major upcoming change is the ability to see which filters are the slowest. This information is currently only available to those with access to Logstash.
• When blocking anonymous users, a cookie will be applied that reloads the block if the user changes their IP. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. This currently only occurs when hard-blocking accounts.
• The block notice shown on mobile will soon be more informative and point users to a help page on how to request an unblock, just as it currently does on desktop.
• There will soon be a calendar widget at Special:Block, making it easier to set expiries for a specific date and time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee is seeking additional clerks to help with the arbitration process.

Obituaries

• Lankiveil (Craig Franklin) passed away in mid-April. Lankiveil joined Wikipedia on 12 August 2004 and became an administrator on 31 August 2008. During his time with the Wikimedia community, Lankiveil served as an oversighter for the English Wikipedia and as president of Wikimedia Australia.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Antonia Ferrín Moreiras, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Galicia and Santander (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I see you took the refimprove tag out, can the article be put back into selected may 20th? Mhhossein took it out and I dont' want to start with him again. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 16:56, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

A recent edit you made to Trevi Fountain where you removed the name "Giuseppe Pannini" left the rest of the sentence kind of farkled. Can you take a look? Thanks. Lakemirror (talk) 16:53, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

@Lakemirror: Sorry, can you be more specific? I don't quite see what you mean. —howcheng {chat} 17:06, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, of course. Second to last paragraph under "commission, construction and design", reads as follows: "The Trevi Fountain was finished in 1762, who substituted the present allegories for planned sculptures of... " Lakemirror (talk) 19:00, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Got it, thanks. —howcheng {chat} 19:13, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

See Wikipedia_talk:Selected_anniversaries/May_23#Please_remove_I-5_Skagit_River_Bridge_collapse,_totally_unimportant. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:50, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Al Ameer son • AliveFreeHappy • Cenarium • Lupo • MichaelBillington

Guideline and policy news

• Following a successful request for comment, administrators are now able to add and remove editors to the "event coordinator" group. Users in the event coordinator group have the ability to temporarily add the "confirmed" flag to new user accounts and to create many new user accounts without being hindered by a rate limit. Users will no longer need to be in the "account creator" group if they are in the event coordinator group.
• Following an AN discussion, all pages with content related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies, broadly construed, are now under indefinite general sanctions.

Technical news

• IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in June. This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.
• The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team will build granular types of blocks in 2018 (e.g. a block from uploading or editing specific pages, categories, or namespaces, as opposed to a full-site block). Feedback on the concept may be left at the talk page.
• There is now a checkbox on Special:ListUsers to let you see only users in temporary user groups.
• It is now easier for blocked mobile users to see why they were blocked.

Arbitration

• A recent technical issue with the Arbitration Committee's spam filter inadvertently caused all messages sent to the committee through Wikipedia (i.e. Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee) to be discarded. If you attempted to send an email to the Arbitration Committee via Wikipedia between May 16 and May 31, your message was not received and you are encouraged to resend it. Messages sent outside of these dates or directly to the Arbitration Committee email address were not affected by this issue.

Miscellaneous

• In early May, an unusually high level of failed login attempts was observed. The WMF has stated that this was an "external effort to gain unauthorized access to random accounts". Under Wikipedia policy, administrators are required to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

I addressed the issues you noted recently regarding needed citations in the Ford Motor Company article. It should at minimum be added back to the Eligible section in Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/June 16. Jackdude101 ^talk cont 01:35, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

@Jackdude101: Thanks. We won't be running it, though, because Ford Piquette Avenue Plant is TFA. —howcheng {chat} 01:57, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

@Jackdude101: Actually, the 20th century section could use some more citations. I see 4 paragraphs with no citations, and half the 1st paragraph as well. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 03:23, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

On the topic of insufficient citations, there are currently citation needed tags in two articles that you have scheduled for June 16: Battle of Fort Beauséjour and Liu Yang (astronaut). There's no telling when they were put in place, but I'm betting that they have been there for a while. For the record, the Ford Motor Company article, prior to your recent edits, had no citation needed tags. Any given article does not need to be featured quality with citations for every piece of information in order to be eligible for inclusion in the On this day section of the main page. Jackdude101 ^talk cont 13:15, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

I just observed the articles listed on the main page for today here: TFA, and one of the articles, Transatlantic flight of Alcock and Brown, has a citation needed tag that has been in place since before this month. It concerns me that you are giving the green light to all of these blurbs that are in fact ineligible. Jackdude101 ^talk cont 13:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

@Jackdude101: I can't speak for TFA, but a small number of CN tags isn't going to disqualify an article from OTD. OTD articles don't have to be perfect, but they have to be good enough. The hard rule is no yellow-level or higher maintenance tags, or the equivalent thereof. So yes, there's a bit of a judgement call: at some point, if I'm going to add a bunch of CN tags to an article/section, that might warrant a {{refimprove}} instead, which would be disqualifying. And lest you think I'm the only gatekeeper, I'm only doing the first review and I'm actually fairly lenient (The Rambling Man is the most prolific enforcer, but there are others). I can guarantee you that if Ford Motor Company were to be listed in its current state, it would get reported at WP:ERRORS as being of insufficient quality. Regardless, because TFA this year is a Ford article which is presumably being shown because it's the anniversary of the company's founding, it would be omitted from OTD anyway due to the longstanding rule that OTD doesn't duplicate subjects featured in TFA or POTD. Hope that makes sense. —howcheng {chat} 15:49, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi! I am from Hungarian Wikipedia. What do you think of this file? Would be transfer to Commons? No source, I have not found here. --Regasterios (talk) 18:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

@Regasterios: If it doesn't have a source, it would not be a good idea to transfer to Commons. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 18:35, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Ok. --Regasterios (talk) 18:35, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Adrianople (324), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eutropius (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:12, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2018).

Administrator changes

Pbsouthwood • TheSandDoctor

Gogo Dodo

Andrevan • Doug • EVula • KaisaL • Tony Fox • WilyD

Bureaucrat changes

Andrevan • EVula

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC about the deletion of drafts closed with a consensus to change the wording of WP:NMFD. Specifically, a draft that has been repeatedly resubmitted and declined at AfC without any substantial improvement may be deleted at MfD if consensus determines that it is unlikely to ever meet the requirements for mainspace and it otherwise meets one of the reasons for deletion outlined in the deletion policy.
• A request for comment closed with a consensus that the {{promising draft}} template cannot be used to indefinitely prevent a WP:G13 speedy deletion nomination.

Technical news

• Starting on July 9, the WMF Security team, Trust & Safety, and the broader technical community will be seeking input on an upcoming change that will restrict editing of site-wide JavaScript and CSS to a new technical administrators user group. Bureaucrats and stewards will be able to grant this right per a community-defined process. The intention is to reduce the number of accounts who can edit frontend code to those who actually need to, which in turn lessens the risk of malicious code being added that compromises the security and privacy of everyone who accesses Wikipedia. For more information, please review the FAQ.
• Syntax highlighting has been graduated from a Beta feature on the English Wikipedia. To enable this feature, click the highlighter icon () in your editing toolbar (or under the hamburger menu in the 2017 wikitext editor). This feature can help prevent you from making mistakes when editing complex templates.
• IP-based cookie blocks should be deployed to English Wikipedia in July (previously scheduled for June). This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface.

Miscellaneous

• Currently around 20% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 17% a year ago. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless if you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.

Hi, This file should be copied on Commons. We already have a whole category: c:Category:Woman crying as she hails Hitler. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:22, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

@Yann: But the license for File:"The tragedy of this Sudeten woman, unable to conceal her misery as she dutifully salutes the triumphant Hitler, is the - NARA - 535891.jpg is wrong. It's not a work of the US government. And the license for the Bundesarchive version is only valid for that size. Unless you think {{PD-anon-70-EU}} applies? —howcheng {chat} 16:11, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I think that {{PD-anon-70-EU}} is OK here. I will fix it on Commons. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:13, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

I am going to try to make Special Olympics good enough for OTD July 20 (50th anniversary of first games) . I am getting off soon but will try to have it mostly done by 16th or 17th. Hope all is well with you. Alanscottwalker (talk) 00:32, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Howcheng. In doomed attempt to gather more forces at ERRORS to cope with issues which are often unresolved for hours and hours (not usually OTD), it's been made apparent that some of the disgruntled wish for me to be excluded from making contributions there any further. So I shall not, but will record my own error log here just in case it's of interest to you. I've very much enjoyed working with you over the last couple of years (I'm sure the same cannot be said in return) and I also very much appreciate your businesslike approach to resolving issues I've raised and getting the job done quietly and efficiently. It's a shame other sections of the main page aren't run with such consideration to our readers. All the best to you. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:57, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: I think it's a matter of the old saying, "You catch more flies with honey than vinegar," although that implies that admins are flies, but whatever. I greatly respect the work you do and the attention and effort you put into vetting the blurbs/articles on the Main Page (I may not agree with every point you bring up, but then again I don't have any particular objections to those points either, so I just make the changes even when I think they're unnecessary), so please take this advice in the spirit that it's given: you'll find people a lot more agreeable if you just bite your tongue a little bit. Yes, I understand it's frustrating, and I could just as easily comment on stuff that goes on in DYK and the reluctance of some people to recognize when there's a problem, but I keep my mouth shut because to me, it's just not worth the hassle. I already have enough bozos who complain that I need consensus to add references to a section of an article that doesn't have any that I don't need any more headache. I'd say you have to decide what's important to you: expressing yourself freely, or getting problems solved. If the latter, then please recognize that some people just need to be coddled and it's more effective to play nice than not. So that's my 2p, for what it's worth. You are of course free to ignore that if you so wish. I'll add your page to my watchlist since you are effectively my QA team. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 22:06, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Cheers. But the point is really not that I’m hoping admins will do me a favour, more that there’s a collective responsibility to maintain the integrity of the main page. I’m not interested in coddling sensitive admins into fixing issues. I’ll opt out and keep my own records from now on. Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:18, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

I suppose they don't really need to be coddled. They just don't need to browbeaten. —howcheng {chat} 22:59, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm just catching up with this and with some of the stupidity that has gone on at AN. TRM, please come back - your time, devotion and expertise is needed. Posting to a backwater just isn't going to help. I think the efforts at AN have been productive - there has been an increase in sysop names appearing in the logs there. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 10:42, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 10:39, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, is there anyway to place Sovereignty Restoration Day pipelinked as “Lā Hoʻihoʻi Ea (Hawaiian Sovereignty Restoration Day)” to honor the Hawaiian language in place of Ka Hae Hawaiian Flag Day? This year is the 175th anniversary of the 1843 restoration and there are a lot of events going on in the islands to commemorate it including the unveiling of a statue of Kamehameha III at Thomas Square. KAVEBEAR (talk) 07:32, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

@KAVEBEAR: No reason to replace Flag Day. I just added it to the end. (BTW, in case you are tempted, you won't be able to upload a photo of the statue to Commons due to FOP restrictions.) —howcheng {chat} 15:45, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I know. I’ve remember what happened the last few times I’ve done so for other works. Dang FOP. :)KAVEBEAR (talk) 15:49, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2018).

Administrator changes

Sro23

KaisaL • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

• After a discussion at Meta, a new user group called "interface administrators" (formerly "technical administrator") has been created. Come the end of August, interface admins will be the only users able to edit site-wide JavaScript and CSS pages like MediaWiki:Common.js and MediaWiki:Common.css, or edit other user's personal JavaScript and CSS. The intention is to improve security and privacy by reducing the number of accounts which could be used to compromise the site or another user's account through malicious code. The new user group can be assigned and revoked by bureaucrats. Discussion is ongoing to establish details for implementing the group on the English Wikipedia.
• Following a request for comment, the WP:SISTER style guideline now states that in the mainspace, interwiki links to Wikinews should only be made as per the external links guideline. This generally means that within the body of an article, you should not link to Wikinews about a particular event that is only a part of the larger topic. Wikinews links in "external links" sections can be used where helpful, but not automatically if an equivalent article from a reliable news outlet could be linked in the same manner.

Technical news

• The WMF Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input on the second set of wireframes for the Special:Block redesign that will introduce partial blocks. The new functionality will allow you to block a user from editing a specific set of pages, pages in a category, a namespace, and for specific actions such as moving pages and uploading files.

Hi Howcheng, just a quick note to say that DYK prohibit articles being featured that have been on the main page, bold linked. Now it was pure coincidence that you removed Maurice from today's OTD as it happened to be running tomorrow in DYK. Had it run at OTD, it would have precluded it from running tomorrow in DYK. Probably worth checking the items you are listing to see if they're about to run as DYKs. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:50, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

I think that's a first, where OTD gets to an article before DYK. Every other time it's been the opposite. —howcheng {chat} 15:42, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Quite probably, but now DYKs can be GAs, it's more likely than before. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:43, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Howcheng. Can you see if your concerns regarding Battle of al-Harrah is resolved? Thanks. --Mhhossein ^talk 14:17, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Some, but there are still a few other things, which I have marked. —howcheng {chat} 15:52, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Would you please take another look? Regards. --Mhhossein ^talk 06:23, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Where do you get this OR nonsense?? The sitter has always been unclear, but no one has ever seriously questioned that it is by Titian. If you have been bitten by the User:The Rambling Man, I suggest you seek medical attention urgently, and refrain from editing anything to do with the main page until successfully treated. This irresponsible and uninformed last-minute tinkering with the main page has got completely out of hand. For fuck's sake! Of course, no attempt to raise the matter on any talk page. There's no fun in that. Johnbod (talk) 17:23, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Dude, why are you getting so upset? This is just your run-of-the-mill BRD, so there's no need to get your knickers in a twist. —howcheng {chat} 17:38, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Oh, so it doesn't matter that people are fucking about with the main page based on ignorant whims? Ask your pal TRM about that. Johnbod (talk) 18:11, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Seriously, what is with the attitude? All you had to do was come to me and say, "Hey, nobody seriously doubts the authorship of the painting," and we would have discussed it like professionals and assuming I'm wrong, I would have said, "OK, thanks" and reverted myself. Instead, you get all hot-headed and ride in here on your high horse and unnecessarily cause all sorts of negativity. I don't need that in my life, and I'm sure you don't either, so why did you feel the need to explode? Both of us have been on this site for many years and even though we haven't interacted much, I've always had a certain amount of respect for you, which is now lessened by your impetuousness. —howcheng {chat} 18:20, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Likewise - I never thought you were the sort of person to do something so recklessly high-handed, but clearly TRM's bad influence is spreading all too fast. I'm the impetuous one??? Johnbod (talk) 18:54, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

bod you’d better watch your tone and personal attacks. Your impetuous posts and tone here are close to blockable, and why bring me into it? I have nothing to do with this situation and you need to calm down and apologise. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:08, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

I will be taking this personal attack to ANI tomorrow when I get time, I don’t think it’s reasonable to completely out of the blue start asking if someone has been bitten by another editor and if so, to seek urgent medical attention. Your tone and edits have made it clear this isn’t in jest. I hope this can be redacted before the drama boards are involved but if not, see you there bod. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:25, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Looks like a number of editors are carefully monitoring this and your edits, so I'm going to pause and allow you some further rope so we only need to make a one-way trip to ANI in the near future, cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:07, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Asterion • Crisco 1492 • KF • Kudpung • Liz • Randykitty • Spartaz

Optimist on the run → Voice of Clam

Interface administrator changes

Amorymeltzer • Mr. Stradivarius • MusikAnimal • MSGJ • TheDJ • Xaosflux

Guideline and policy news

• Following a "stop-gap" discussion, six users have temporarily been made interface administrators while discussion is ongoing for a more permanent process for assigning the permission. Interface administrators are now the only editors allowed to edit sitewide CSS and JavaScript pages, as well as CSS/JS pages in another user's userspace. Previously, all administrators had this ability. The right can be granted and revoked by bureaucrats.

Technical news

• Because of a data centre test you will be able to read but not edit the wikis for up to an hour on 12 September and 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time. The time when you can't edit might be shorter than an hour.
• Some abuse filter variables have changed. They are now easier to understand for non-experts. The old variables will still work but filter editors are encouraged to replace them with the new ones. You can find the list of changed variables on mediawiki.org. They have a note which says Deprecated. Use ... instead. An example is article_text which is now page_title.
• Abuse filters can now use how old a page is. The variable is page_age.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee has resolved to perform a round of Checkuser and Oversight appointments. The usernames of all applicants will be shared with the Functionaries team, and they will be requested to assist in the vetting process. The deadline to submit an application is 23:59 UTC, 12 September, and the candidates that move forward will be published on-wiki for community comments on 18 September.

Dear Howcheng,

Back in May you had reverted the approval of a DYK nomination of mine concerning the article "Slavic speakers in Ottoman Macedonia". After edits were made to the article, you marked the nomination as "passed", but it seems that it has somehow been forgotten and in any case has not followed the steps envisaged in the regular process of DYK nominations ["Prep" etc]. I am wondering if there is something that could be done regarding this matter by you in your capacity as the user that closed the discussion and as an administrator.

Regards, Ashmedai 119 (talk) 16:00, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ashmedai 119: Can you please post this to WT:DYK? I am not normally involved with DYK. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 16:07, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks for the speedy response and advice. Ashmedai 119 (talk) 16:17, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi Howcheng, I'm trying to resolve Ashmedai 119's concerns. Just want to note that when you approve a DYK nomination, please keep all your comments and icons under the line that says Please do not edit above this line unless you are a DYK volunteer who is closing the discussion. In this case, you wrote "yes" to the "passed" parameter that's filled in when the hook is promoted to prep. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 17:55, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for bringing the issue to my attention. I was being lazy when I uploaded it, and I didn't cite properly. The real source is from here:
http://rainfall.geography.hawaii.edu/
It's an image taken by Professor John DeLay of the University of Hawaii at Manoa. I'm currently trying to contact him to gain his permission to use it, but if I don't get that permission, I will look for another image of the Big Bog, if one exists. (I am doubtful) Nonetheless, it is good that you called me out on this, as it's not in line with Wikipedia's policy and should not go ignored. Sorry! and Thank you! Ivvavik (talk) 23:41, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ivvavik: Please see Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for instructions. Thanks. —howcheng {chat} 01:00, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

selected anniversaries

Thank you for quality articles such as Casa de Estudillo and Ygnacio del Valle, for the constant maintenance of the OTD section on the Main page, for admin services, for nominating exquisite images for featured, such as Hale-Bopp, for "Hey, it's one of those rare days when we have no war items." - Howard, repeating (15 October 2009): you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:50, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

It's the 150th anniversary of the opening of St. Pancras railway station. Impressive piece of architecture, and a Good Article. Could it be posted with an image? Mjroots (talk) 14:12, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

@Mjroots: Done. —howcheng {chat} 14:51, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2018).

Administrator changes

Justlettersandnumbers • L235

Bgwhite • HorsePunchKid • J Greb • KillerChihuahua • Rami R • Winhunter

Interface administrator changes

Cyberpower678 • Deryck Chan • Oshwah • Pharos • Ragesoss • Ritchie333

Oversight changes

Guerillero • NativeForeigner • Snowolf • Xeno

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the process for appointing interface administrators has been established. Currently only existing admins can request these rights, while a new RfC has begun on whether it should be available to non-admins.
• There is an open request for comment on Meta regarding the creation a new user group for global edit filter management.

Technical news

• Partial blocks should be available for testing in October on the Test Wikipedia and the Beta-Cluster. This new feature allows admins to block users from editing specific pages and in the near-future, namespaces and uploading files. You can expect more updates and an invitation to help with testing once it is available.
• The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team is currently looking for input on how to measure the effectiveness of blocks. This is in particular related to how they will measure the success of the aforementioned partial blocks.
• Because of a data centre test, you will be able to read but not edit the Wikimedia projects for up to an hour on 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee has, by motion, amended the procedure on functionary inactivity.
• The community consultation for 2018 CheckUser and Oversight appointments has concluded. Appointments will be made by October 11.
• Following a request for comment, the size of the Arbitration Committee will be decreased to 13 arbitrators, starting in 2019. Additionally, the minimum support percentage required to be appointed to a two-year term on ArbCom has been increased to 60%. ArbCom candidates who receive between 50% and 60% support will be appointed to one-year terms instead.
• Nominations for the 2018 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission are being accepted until 12 October. These are the editors who help run the ArbCom election smoothly. If you are interested in volunteering for this role, please consider nominating yourself.

I like your adding the chapter numerals. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 21:46, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

In this edit, the Edward Hawke, 1st Baron Hawke article says he died on October 17, not 16. Art LaPella (talk) 00:31, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Hawke was listed in October 16#Deaths, which is where I got him from. I moved him to the correct dates. —howcheng {chat} 01:26, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Hi Howcheng, sorry not to spot your comments at that earthquake article earlier. I've attempted to answer your points - let me know on the talk page if you feel that's insufficient. Mikenorton (talk) 14:41, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1946 Bihar riots, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Mohammad Yunus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Not a pleasant surprise on a vacation day to wake up to: that the hook planned for a composer's birthday is not seen on the main page, nor anywhere else (like a prep area, or a reopened nom, - and how about a ping). The [[Template:Did you know nominations/Praeludium (Waterhouse)|original hook in the nomination}} didn't contain "signature piece", can you please use that? I can remove the phrase in the article also it if bothers you. Please find a way to return a hook to the Main page, for a happy birthday. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:44, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

It's no mystery that I know the composer - as many others about whom I write - and his case that I even do his website. You can find it on google because SchroCat removed it from the article. See youself if it contains anything but fact. All I do is tranlate what he writes to German. I write my articles on independent sources, to avoid conflict. Interest yes, conflict no. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:21, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Speaking of "how about a ping", you could try that too, Gerda if you are going to mention me.

Howcheng, as I mentioned on TRM's error page, if you would like me to email the details, I will do. This is most likely a COI, or there is a possibility it's a SPS: either way it shouldn't be on the main page, and that goes for the rest of the Waterhouse DYKs too. I am not sure what I am supposed to have removed from the Praeludium article: I have never edited the article, I have only put a COI tag on the talk page. Cheers - SchroCat (talk)

Psalm 133, or how good it is to live together in unity, or AGF. In 2009, I filled a red link for Graham Waterhouse. It was deleted within minutes, but Cmadler helped me to write a neutral article, and nominated it for DYK. I thought it would be my only article, but then there was this red link in it, Siegfried Palm, one of the few cellists mentioned in cello, and every new article seems to lead to more red links that want to be filled ;) - Congrats to 100k contributions! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:55, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Reply

Thank you for pointing that out. I only put the tag after reading this nomination page: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Imelda Marcos/archive3. I would also like to thank you for revamping the article. I think it would be better if the self-published sources is either cited as the older sources (with a disclaimer "republished by..."), or replaced entirely with more eligible sources. Kind regards. Mimihitam (talk) 20:58, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2018).

Administrator changes Sir Sputnik Kudpung • Liz • Lourdes Everyking • Jackmcbarn Interface administrator changes Dinoguy1000

CheckUser changes AGK • Ivanvector • Stwalkerster • TonyBallioni Oversight changes Amorymeltzer • Oshwah • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93 Keilana

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment determined that non-administrators will not be able to request interface admin access.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the Mediation Committee should be closed and marked as historical.
• A village pump discussion has been ongoing about whether the proposed deletion policy (PROD) should be clarified or amended.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether pending changes protection should be applied automatically to today's featured article (TFA) in order to mitigate a recent trend of severe image vandalism.

Technical news

• Partial blocks is now available for testing on the Test Wikipedia. The new functionality allows you to block users from editing specific pages. Bugs may exist and can be reported on the local talk page or on Meta. A discussion regarding deployment to English Wikipedia will be started by community liaisons sometime in the near future.
• A user script is now available to quickly review unblock requests.
• The 2019 Community Wishlist Survey is now accepting new proposals until November 11, 2018. The results of this survey will determine what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year. Voting on the proposals will take place from November 16 to November 30, 2018. Specifically, there is a proposal category for admins and stewards that may be of interest.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors will be invited to nominate themselves as candidates in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 4 until November 13. Voting will begin on November 19 and last until December 2.
• The Arbitration Committee's email address has changed to arbcom-enwikimedia.org. Other email lists, such as functionaries-en and clerks-l, remain unchanged.

Disambiguation link notification for November 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Public holidays in Panama, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fiestas Patrias (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Congratulations

		100000 Edits
		Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that only 523 editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!

-- Dolotta (talk) 21:54, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Citing sources for Hebrew calendar dates

I had a very unpleasant discussion with The Rambling Man on this subject around September 30. And I don't want to start in with that user again. Yet, since you watch these pages for front-page mentions, I'd like to understand the issue here.

Consider that if one is converting from Gregorian date to Hebrew calendar date, one need merely use a parser function: {{#time:xjj xjF xjY|3 December 2018}} produces 25 Kislev 5779. So as long as one has established with a reliable source that Hanukkah's date on the Hebrew calendar is 25 Kislev, I would think that the fact that the MediaWiki software itself does this conversion makes the conversion "obvious" or "WP:BLUE" or whatever you might like to call it.

Now, the template {{Moveable date}} simply does that conversion in reverse: {{Moveable date |holiday=Hanukkah |year=2018}} produces Sunset, 2 December 2018 – nightfall, 10 December 2018. Now I won't argue the point that it might be "better" (whatever that means) to include a source. Yet, I would argue that the absence of a source isn't really such a terrible problem in the overall scheme of things. So what is such a big flaming problem with all of this?

Thanks for your point of view. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:14, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

@StevenJ81: I'm with on you this, but the way I approach this is "give the baby his bottle". It's very little effort to put the citation there and it's not going to hurt, so if it makes him happy, then let's just take the path of least resistance. Happily, the template will do this if you add the empty |cite= parameter so it's minimal work for us. —howcheng {chat} 16:56, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm glad to know that I'm not totally losing my mind on this. (If he ever tries to disqualify an article solely on this basis I'll let you know, though I think that pretty unlikely.) StevenJ81 (talk) 17:26, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

OTD for 11-11-2018

Hi Howcheng. Looking through the history of OTD and selected anniversaries, I noticed that in the past (such as here in 2015) you have removed 1918 from OTD when WWI features in POTD. Given that this is the 100th anniversary of the end of WWI, would it be possible to make an exception here and include it (along with Armistice Day and so forth)? Carcharoth (talk) 13:14, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I've trimmed down the unreferenced material and added it to the OTD page. I had actually been thinking about this specific OTD entry for months but I never found time and energy to add references, so this morning I just plain removed the uncited material. L293D (☎ • ✎) 16:06, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

@Carcharoth and L293D: As I said on Iridescent's talk page, the Armistice article should be excluded, but we do have two other related articles that we can use. L293D: I'm especially concerned about this edit. Removing the section about the rail car is fine because that's not really that important to the actual events, but these two paragraphs seem more crucial to the narrative. —howcheng {chat} 16:52, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I have added some citations to improve the referencing. If there is material there that still needs citations, let me know. Would you be happy to let 1918 stay in the OTD for this year, despite the PoTD clash? I am sure readers will be interested in both on this particular anniversary, and both the picture and the OTD item will probably get a good deal of people following the links. Carcharoth (talk) 18:42, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Edward the Black Prince

With Revision as of 17:51, 8 October 2018 you added some needed citations to Edward the Black Prince. However one of them:

• von Redlich, Marcellus Donald R. Pedigrees of Some of the Emperor Charlemagne's Descendants. Vol. I. p. 64.

is missing the year of publication and the location/publisher. Please will you add the additional information? I have now reformatted the citation so that it is in the same format as the other citations in the article (short inline, long citation in the "References" section and using CS2) so you will find the long citation in the References section of the article -- PBS (talk) 20:16, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

@PBS: I'm sure I copied that from another article. Anyway, I have filled in the details. —howcheng {chat} 03:09, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt reply. WorldCat contains a number of years with that publisher and isbn; so I have chosen an ebook edition with a year of 2009 -- please feel free to correct it if necessary.

If one copies a reference from another article although it is not necessary attribute in the edit history, however it is useful to include the original article in the edit history so that if there is an error or omission in the citation it can be traced through the edit history see WP:Copying within Wikipedia#Other reasons for attributing text. -- PBS (talk) 14:42, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Howcheng. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Duration of Montgomery's Tavern skirmish

Did a quick search looking for citations from reliable sources about the duration of the 'battle'. The shortest was "a few minutes", most at 15 minutes or a quarter of an hour and the longest was a half-hour. What does your research show? TIA  Natty10000 | Natter  12:04, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@Natty10000: I didn't do any research. My concern was just that the paragraph was self-contradictory. There's one sentence where it says There are varying accounts on the length of the battle. Some say it was very short while others say the fighting lasted an hour. And then at the very end of that same paragraph it said, In less than half an hour the confrontation was over. So those two statements can't both be true. My edit was just an attempt to reconcile the discrepancy. —howcheng {chat} 18:49, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Copy edited your change plus the general area to address the duration issue (which isn't really meaningful) and to make the section flow a bit beter. When I have some time, I'll go through the entire entry to make it read more easily. Thanks Natty10000 | Natter  10:41, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Can you offer your opinion in this discussion?

Hi. In the past you've offered your opinion in choosing photos for the Infobox. Can you offer your neutral opinion in this discussion on a related topic? It may go toward a precedent regarding captions. Thanks, and Happy Holidays. Nightscream (talk) 20:09, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Mary Somerville

I don't feel comfortable substituting articles, but for Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/November 28, Mary Somerville died on November 29 not 28, according to her article. Art LaPella (talk) 07:59, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I hate it when people are listed on the wrong date. —howcheng {chat} 16:39, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Bobby Charleton Template - Lack of References

Hello. Your edit of 2017-10-09 in which you added a BLP template in which it is noted that many paragraphs have no citations. At the time the article already had 44 citations, and it now has some 51 citations. After all, are you meaning to suggest that editors must relentlessly scrutinize every paragraph in the article for where they can be cited? Please review and if necessary, update the template to the current date or perhaps it may be removed?
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Howcheng (talk | contribs) at 16:58, 9 October 2017 (this article needs more references)

Thanks in advance, B'H. 172.250.246.150 (talk) 20:27, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

It's not a matter of merely counting the number of references in an article. There are numerous paragraphs, mostly in the "Club career" and "International career" sections, that have no citations (in fact, the entire Munich section has zero). If I were to add {{cn}} tags to the article, I'd end up littering them all over the place. —howcheng {chat} 22:12, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Rufus W. Wheeler

Following up on your excellent idea of changing Rufus Wheeler Peckham to Rufus W. Peckham to accommodate documented ambiguity around his middle name. Would you change the page name to the latter, then? (I don't know how, or if it's an Admin task only.) Thank you for your scholarship and for your courtesy. Sunny Clark (talk) 01:26, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 December 2018

Administrators' newsletter – December 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2018).

Administrator changes

Al Ameer son • Randykitty • Spartaz

Boson • Daniel J. Leivick • Efe • Esanchez7587 • Fred Bauder • Garzo • Martijn Hoekstra • Orangemike

Interface administrator changes

Deryck Chan

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the Mediation Committee is now closed and will no longer be accepting case requests.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether members of the Bot Approvals Group should satisfy activity requirements in order to remain in that role.
• A request for comment is in progress regarding whether to change the administrator inactivity policy, such that administrators "who have made no logged administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped". Currently, the policy states that administrators "who have made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped".
• A proposal has been made to temporarily restrict editing of the Main Page to interface administrators in order to mitigate the impact of compromised accounts.

Technical news

• Administrators and bureaucrats can no longer unblock themselves unless they placed the block initially. This change has been implemented globally. See also this ongoing village pump discussion (permalink).
• To complement the aforementioned change, blocked administrators will soon have the ability to block the administrator that placed their block to mitigate the possibility of a compromised administrator account blocking all other active administrators.
• Since deployment of Partial blocks on Test Wikipedia, several bugs were identified. Most of them are now fixed. Administrators are encouraged to test the new deployment and report new bugs on Phabricator or leave feedback on the Project's talk page. You can request administrator access on the Test Wiki here.

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 3 December 2018. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous

• In late November, an attacker compromised multiple accounts, including at least four administrator accounts, and used them to vandalize Wikipedia. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. Sharing the same password across multiple websites makes your account vulnerable, especially if your password was used on a website that suffered a data breach. As these incidents have shown, these concerns are not pure fantasies.
• Wikipedia policy requires administrators to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

Obituaries

• Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (Raymond Arritt) passed away on 14 November 2018. Boris joined Wikipedia as Raymond arritt on 8 May 2006 and was an administrator from 30 July 2007 to 2 June 2008.

Death date

For Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/December 13, the Lupe Vélez article says she died on December 14 not 13. Art LaPella (talk) 04:28, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 December 2018

Administrators' newsletter – January 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).

Administrator changes Galobtter Orangemike BorgQueen • Davidruben • Ocee • Revolving Bugbear • Theda • There'sNoTime • Timc • Tijuana Brass • Tristessa de St Ange Bureaucrat changes Addshore

CheckUser changes Joe Roe • SilkTork Euryalus • Newyorkbrad • There'sNoTime Oversight changes AGK • Joe Roe • SilkTork Euryalus • Newyorkbrad • There'sNoTime

Guideline and policy news

• There are a number of new or changed speedy deletion criteria, each previously part of WP:CSD#G6:

1. G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
2. R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
3. G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.

• The Wikimedia Foundation now requires all interface administrators to enable two-factor authentication.
• Members of the Bot Approvals Group (BAG) are now subject to an activity requirement. After two years without any bot-related activity (e.g. operating a bot, posting on a bot-related talk page), BAG members will be retired from BAG following a one-week notice.