Jump to content

User talk:Jayron32

Page contents not supported in other languages.
This user has administrator privileges on the English Wikipedia.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Faofln (talk | contribs) at 06:55, 29 March 2022 (→‎sockpuppet: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Administrators' newsletter – January 2022

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

Guideline and policy news

  • Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The functionaries email list (functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Administrators' newsletter – February 2022

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections.
  • The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:01, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked ip may be continuing

I just ran across this [1] highly problematic BLP edit by 2603:6010:5940:F000:2D7C:66CC:7E3:6C95 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) that falls into an ip block you made Feb 4. Thought you should know. --Hipal (talk) 17:12, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've extended the block to encompass the Scott Baio article. --Jayron32 17:16, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Diu

Hi, can you lower the protection for Battle of Diu? There has been no discussion on the talk page since December; I'm not sure full protection until June is preventing any disruption or helping encourage discussion. Thanks. Levivich 15:00, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Erledigt. --Jayron32 16:18, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the quick response! Levivich 17:00, 15 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Music Died

I remember you from Bug's page so long ago. I used to have fun joking in there. It's a good rule that we shouldn't link dates. For some reason though whenever I come across that story I find myself as a reader looking up that date. Is that an absolutely carved in granite rule? SlightSmile 15:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, but in that case it isn't needed. If you are interested in a date, the search bar works well. --Jayron32 15:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. SlightSmile 15:36, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Spacing RfC comment

Thank you for your vote of confidence (and for helping my bad eyes!). I agree it would be best not to have any added reasons to "yell at people", though frankly, even with a "requirement", I'd be happy to spend all of my days just jumping in there on thousands of articles and adding this spacing (as opposed to "making" others do it). I do not see it as something that people would get scolded for too badly, and something that definitely helps me a whole lot (and thus probably other people would like the look better I imagine?). Regardless, I think a suggestion is still preferable to the status quo of not mentioning it either way (which leaves open the possibility of editor disagreement based on aesthetic look alone). ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 13:49, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References Misc. Desk February 14 Stratford CT reply

Moin & Thank You for your input. The issue has shifted somewhat, but I've found out that not only my connection's not stable, appearently I'm occasionally in a blocked range and can't edit on en:wp at all - hence the delay. Just chanced that with my current uplink I can, so I wanted to say thanks and I read your reply, I just couldn't edit an answer. Regards, --G-41614 (talk) 16:26, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rukraine

Re: NYT headline — UKRAINE UNDER FULL-SCALE ATTACK – Sca

Where did I say it wasn't? You seem to be creating things I never said, and trying to argue with your imagination. Please stop that. --User:Jayron32
What you said was that "launches" was preferable. My point was that the invasion had gone beyond being launched and was well under way. I never said anything about what you said or might have thought about the phrase "full-scale attack" cited in the headline. Please quit distorting my comments.
And just in case you'd like to know, current NYT headline says: FIERCE FIGHTING ACROSS UKRAINE. – Sca (talk) 22:19, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've read it. --Jayron32 12:59, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The picture of Brian McKeever and Graham Nishikawa

Hi! I just want to say Thank you again for information I needed about the picture, and let you know I'm using it in upcoming Weekly contest (sv-wp "Veckans tävling"). If you want to see the page, click here. :-) // Zquid (talk) 00:54, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! I'm glad to be of some help! --Jayron32 12:35, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Issue regarding "Liverpool F.C.–Manchester United F.C. rivalry" article

I am currently having an issue on this article. I really don't know who to speak to. The editors there seem biased to Liverpool and aren't even producing facts to back their claims. I have produced countless evidence and I have mentioned it under the comments of each edit. But the editors just ignore my evidence. I am not even arguing something I believe in, I am arguing with facts. The Liverpool editors are arguing that a particular trophy needs to be included in the trophy tally, and I am showing them that the official Liverpool website does not acknowledge this trophy. But they do not wish to see the website. I have even sent the official website but they refuse to look at it. Perhaps you can assist. I am a neutral and I don't support neither club. It seems like its me verse subjective Liverpool supporters. The trophy is called sheriff of London charity shield. See link : https://www.liverpoolfc.com/history/honours — Preceding unsigned comment added by HMD 1315 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see you just made your very first edit to Talk:Liverpool F.C.–Manchester United F.C. rivalry. That's a good start. Give the discussion some time to develop, see where the general consensus lies, most importantly don't speculate on the motivations of other people, and try to convince people of your side using evidence and logic. --Jayron32 17:11, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately this debate has been going on from yesterday. Manchester United supporters are agreeing with me , however Liverpool supporters are literally ignoring my evidence and are just undoing/reverting my changes, without any discussion. This is a really fierce rivalry for both supporters, I really don't think this will come to an end. If you look at the edits history, you can see I have produced tonnes of evidence and explanations, but it is literally ignored unfortunately :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by HMD 1315 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to make this clearer for you. Make your case on the talk page. Give it some days to see where it falls. STOP referring to people who edit the article as "supporters" of one team or another. It's pointless, and rude. Also, you've made only one edit to the article talk page. That's not "producing tonnes of evidence and explanation". You've left no evidence or explanation on the article talk page. --Jayron32 17:39, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I will add my evidence on the talk page, the evidence I was referring to was in the edits history page, where I was giving a summary for my edits, because I saw people talking and asking me stuff over there. Thank you so much for your advice, I will definitely heed everything you have said. Sorry for my misjudgements. Really appreciate your assitance :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by HMD 1315 (talk • contribs) 17:46, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry if I stepped on your toes. It occurs to me that if you were already aware of the ANI thread (I assumed at the time you weren't, but now I think I was wrong) it made me look more arrogant than intended. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:26, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's all good. They needed to hear it from multiple people, I think. --Jayron32 19:34, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2022

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:46, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AIV report you declined

See here. That IP had already been blocked for socking, and as noted the first edit summary pretty much admits it.

I have taken the liberty of blocking them for the next month. Daniel Case (talk) 21:24, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I wasn't familiar with the person so named, and didn't see any obvious vandalism, which is why I declined it. That's why it's better not to use AIV for those things. With several hundred active admins dealing with AIV, not all of us know every sockmaster on sight by behavior. --Jayron32 11:47, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:AlanEdgarConsebido

Hello there, can you also please consider revoking TP access to the account as the sockmaster continued to edit on the aformentioned page despite being blocked due to sockpuppetry? See this recent edit which I've reverted it right away after I saw it on my watchlist. Thanks! VictorTorres2002 (talk) 15:31, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nachos, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salsa.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotection

Hello, I am requesting unprotection of Mimi Lockhart, I have made a request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Decrease#Mimi Lockhart. Notifying you as the protecting admin. Thanks, Terasail[✉️] 16:00, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Val James https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Val_James

I agree that my edit of this page ("James was the first African American born in the United States") does seem redundant. The reason that it should be edited, though, is that the term African American, is often used in Canada. Yes, African Canadian is commonly seen and heard as well, but African American is often taken to mean a North American of African descent--usually from the United States or Canada. While there is a link to the page on Willie O'Ree near the bottom of the article under "See also", one could easily assume that James was the first Black player in the league. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Graham.pub (talk • contribs) 17:42, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you, but we need to use the correct terms, not just conform to people's misconceptions. I did add a note to the bottom of the article regarding Willie O'Ree, the first Black Canadian to appear in the NHL. Leaving Val James as "African American" is fully correct. African Americans are not African Canadians. --Jayron32 17:45, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

sockpuppet

@Jayron32:, I am a sockpuppet of User:Skh sourav halder. Faofln (talk) 06:55, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jayron32&oldid=1079898833"