User talk:Unician
Venix as a DEC OS
Hi,
I removed Venix from Category:DEC operating systems. If we start doing this, then Linux is a Sun operating system, Windows is a Dell and Compaq operating system, and NetBSD will also have to be put in dozens of categories. Perhaps Foonly should be removed from Category:DEC hardware instead. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 11:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Your request at WP:RMTR
You asked for a move of Vax gold key to Gold key. I've declined this as a technical move. 'Vax gold key' provides natural disambiguation, while the term 'Gold key' is already in use for a banking term. Feel free to open a {{Requested move}} at Talk:Vax gold key. If you do so, please propose a way to disambiguate the Vax keyboard key from the bank-related meaning of Gold key. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 14:01, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for your quick and helpful feedback. I've followed your suggestion and proposed a new, unambiguous, name via the talk page. 50.181.30.121 (talk) 00:56, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Lesser extinctions
Hey... just letting you know that I've blocked the original editor for several reasons, among them abuse of other editors (language on the talk page was awful) and because he made a few legal threats against other editors (threatened to call the cops). I doubt very seriously that he'll be able to make me feel comfortable about unblocking him in general, but even if by some chance he does change I don't think that it'd really be good to give him a copy in his userspace. I'll be honest that I doubt that his series will gain notability in the future, as the likelihood of notability is fairly slim to none and it would ultimately fall under WP:NOTWEBHOST. But mostly it's because the editor was so incredibly abusive that I honestly doubt he'll persuade anyone to unblock him. Between that and his spamming of various articles for his show and YT channel, he'd really, really have to prove himself above and beyond. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 05:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
- Also, the thing to remember is that this is just an idea he came up with and hasn't actually been accepted by any television channel or studio. It's the same as if I were to say "I'd like to create a show about gremlins in NYC for television", as nobody has actually picked it up or confirmed it for television officially. Or like someone saying "one day I want Brad Pitt to be in my films, but right now I'm not an active member of Hollywood, etc". Basically, it looks to be something a kid came up with in school one day and hopes would be turned into a TV show, but isn't in touch with any actual agent, producer, director, TV station, etc. It's not the same as a project that someone is actively shopping to various people. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 06:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
- Sadly, I think it was even worse than you've described. The creator of the ill-fated Lesser or greater extinctions article described seeing the 2009 Animal Planet series Animal Armageddon and wanting to make his own version, keeping the major historical incidents covered by Animal Armageddon’s eight episodes, but adding another ten, more than doubling the length of the series. He acknowledged some of (the many) routine procedural and technical steps needed to move such a project forward, but there was no evidence that he'd considered the bigger questions: How did the (professional) makers of Animal Armageddon start with the “Big Five” extinction events and end up with eight episodes? What judgements were made to balance production costs and schedule slot requirements vs. viewer interest and market value of the end result? Will viewers have the attention span for eighteen episodes? Will they want to see more of what Animal Armageddon has already covered? And what copyright and plagerism issues must be resolved to produce a new program so obviously duplicating an existing one? (… down to details such as Animal Armageddon having an episode titled Fire and Ice and Lesser or greater extinctions proposing one titled Lava and Snow.) So, yes, the prospects of an actual Lesser or greater extinctions being produced were, in round numbers, zero. My suggestion was to follow the themes of “please don't bite the newbies” and “when in doubt, userfy it”; my unwritten hope was that it would give the youthful enthusiasm of the original editor some short-term focus while he learned the conventions of Wikipedia, and that at some point that energy and new understanding would have turned to more realistic purposes. For now, though, that learning curve must be quite steep — I see that the Lesser or greater extinctions external posting here has just been revised to add a second season, for a total of 29 episodes. 50.181.30.121 (talk) 01:36, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- I kind of figured that was the case... I wasn't kind of debating giving him the info if he promised to transfer it off-WP, but the comments he made to other editors on the article's talk page were so awful I ended up banning him. Thanks for being the one willing to give him the benefit of the doubt though- we do need more people willing to step in and remind us all of WP:DONTBITE and stuff like that. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 03:12, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Sadly, I think it was even worse than you've described. The creator of the ill-fated Lesser or greater extinctions article described seeing the 2009 Animal Planet series Animal Armageddon and wanting to make his own version, keeping the major historical incidents covered by Animal Armageddon’s eight episodes, but adding another ten, more than doubling the length of the series. He acknowledged some of (the many) routine procedural and technical steps needed to move such a project forward, but there was no evidence that he'd considered the bigger questions: How did the (professional) makers of Animal Armageddon start with the “Big Five” extinction events and end up with eight episodes? What judgements were made to balance production costs and schedule slot requirements vs. viewer interest and market value of the end result? Will viewers have the attention span for eighteen episodes? Will they want to see more of what Animal Armageddon has already covered? And what copyright and plagerism issues must be resolved to produce a new program so obviously duplicating an existing one? (… down to details such as Animal Armageddon having an episode titled Fire and Ice and Lesser or greater extinctions proposing one titled Lava and Snow.) So, yes, the prospects of an actual Lesser or greater extinctions being produced were, in round numbers, zero. My suggestion was to follow the themes of “please don't bite the newbies” and “when in doubt, userfy it”; my unwritten hope was that it would give the youthful enthusiasm of the original editor some short-term focus while he learned the conventions of Wikipedia, and that at some point that energy and new understanding would have turned to more realistic purposes. For now, though, that learning curve must be quite steep — I see that the Lesser or greater extinctions external posting here has just been revised to add a second season, for a total of 29 episodes. 50.181.30.121 (talk) 01:36, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Tagged!
While browsing the list of potential problems noticed by WP:CHECKWIKI, I decided to check (and fix, if appropriate) some entries for error ID #62, “URL without http prefix”. On my fourth fix, I got a top-of-page warning that I hadn't seen before, the robot equivalent of a skeptical raised eyebrow, wondering if I was spamming Wikipedia with vanity links of my choice. (The edit got Tag: repeated addition of external links by non-autoconfirmed user, which Special:Tags explains as “The user repeatedly and quickly added external links to articles”.) Well, yes, the edits were repeated — there were 18 potential problems on the CheckWiki #62 page, and I had only gotten to four of them at that point — and, yes, they were quick — it doesn't take long to type “http://”, enter an edit summary, preview to verify the change, and save the page. Hopefully some human will check the edit and see that (1) there's an actual edit summary, unlike many mal-edits, (2) the diff confirms that I wasn't adding a Web site address, I was just causing the existing one to cease being broken, and (3) the link is to the International Civil Aviation Organization homepage at www.icao.int, which is perhaps a less entertaining destination for true link spammers. But in the Big Picture, Supercount says that I'm about to pass 1000 edits from various IP addresses, maybe it's time to register a username. 50.181.30.121 (talk) 23:38, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Unician, you are invited to the Teahouse
![]() |
Hi Unician! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. |
CSD tag of John Sampford
Hello, I have noticed that you have tagged John Sampford for deletion under the A7 criteria. I have removed the tag as A7 only applies to people who have no claim of importance, and does not have to pass the notability standards, and being the manager of a sports team is a fairly good claim of importance. Thanks! Darylgolden(talk) 10:00, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
WP:CITEVAR
I want to call your attention to WP:CITEVAR, which indicates the citation style of an article should not be changed unless consensus for the change is reached on the article's talk page. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:56, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Hello. My guess is that you're talking about IBM 3081, where you bulk-reverted all of my recent edits, both citation formats and others. Yes, I see your point about WP:CITEVAR, although I'm slightly intrigued about your focus, since it doesn't appear that you've been an active contributor to that article. I've added {{Parenthetical referencing editnotice}} to the wikisource to lock in that old style more explicitly, and I've tried to reproduce all of my previous edits that did not involve the format of references to citations. Unician ∇ 05:19, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
- My interest dates back to using a 3081 before IBM had assigned a number to it. It replaced the 370 Model 168 we had been using.
- As explained at Wikipedia:Editnotice, edit notices are created by administrators and are only visible when editing a page. They are not displayed to regular readers, who vastly outnumber editors. Jc3s5h (talk) 06:39, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
- Ah, we were using a 370/168, too, a Model 3 if I recall correctly. I don't know what it was replaced with next, but by the 1990s there was a 3090/VF in its place. Oh, and the edit notice on IBM 3081 should be working now. Unician ∇ 03:34, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- As explained at Wikipedia:Editnotice, edit notices are created by administrators and are only visible when editing a page. They are not displayed to regular readers, who vastly outnumber editors. Jc3s5h (talk) 06:39, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
SATAN
Hello — thanks for the extensive update of Security Administrator Tool for Analyzing Networks.
I have a couple of questions based on the new content, if you have a moment.
- I noticed you changed the prose to past-tense, “SATAN was” rather than “SATAN is”. I'm not challenging that, and don't plan to change it back — that's probably the more common usage — but I'm curious about that perspective. SATAN has not been updated in almost twenty years, but it can still be downloaded and it can still be run. So why does one say “SATAN was” but “Mona Lisa is”? Mona Lisa has been “abandoned”, receiving no new content from its creator, a lot longer than SATAN has.
- Do we need to add a longer copyright message to the SATAN logo file? Currently File:SATAN-security-scanner-logo.gif says that the logo is public domain, but the SATAN copyright page here doesn't release it to the public domain, it makes this statement:
- Copyright 1995 by Dan Farmer and Wietse Venema. All rights reserved. Some individual files may be covered by other copyrights (this will be noted in the file itself.)
- Redistribution and use in source and binary forms are permitted provided that this entire copyright notice is duplicated in all such copies.
- I'm not an expert on copyright, but this seems to suggest that we ought to change the “public domain” part to instead reproduce the copyright notice from the SATAN page. Any thoughts? Or should we run this past a Wikipedia authority on copyright? I know that using non-free images is a big red flag on Wikipedia, and I'd really like to keep that logo on the page.
Unician ∇ 07:07, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
- Two reasons.
- A. I don't find the comparison of software to paintings very meaningful in this context. Software is meant to be run, whereas static works of art from the 1500s were meant to be looked at. Software that is no longer being run because it's been replaced by other newer software is out of date, in my opinion.
- B. Since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a catalog of software, the purpose of a page like this is to explain the overall relevance of the article topic to the world. In the case of SATAN, here, the relevance is principally that it was one of the first widely known network scanners, that it garnered a lot of attention (national magazine cover, DOJ threats, etc). and that it then led to a generation of successive software. The fact that it is no longer in use is pretty relevant, and to talk about it in the present tense as if it were still used would be misleading, IMHO.
- I'm no expert either, but your suggestion makes sense. I can't figure out how to modify the page, so please feel free to paste that in. Thank you for the thoughtful feedback.
Jm3 (talk) 23:06, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
Rajeesh menoth
Hi, I didn't delete Rajeesh menoth under WP:CSD#A3 because it did have content at one time; however, the sole author (prior to your {{speedy deletion-no content}}
) was also the person who had removed all content, so I deleted it under WP:CSD#G7. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:23, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
- OK, that looks fine, thank you.
The article creator seems to have switched that previous content to a new (but very similar) article title via a copy-and-paste “move”, and another editor has marked the new title as WP:A7. Oh, and both seem to be auto-biographical. I hope this young person doesn't suffer any identity theft ill-effects after posting personal information such as their exact date-of-birth. Unician ∇ 11:05, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for June 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited FreeLAN, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Point-to-point (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:57, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
- Fixed. Unician ∇ 09:15, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Talkback
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg/40px-Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg.png)
Message added 15:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
ww2censor (talk) 15:53, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 18 June 2014
- News and notes: With paid advocacy in its sights, the Wikimedia Foundation amends their terms of use
- Featured content: Worming our way to featured picture
- Special report: Wikimedia Bangladesh: a chapter's five-year journey
- Traffic report: You can't dethrone Thrones
- WikiProject report: Visiting the city
June 2014
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Virdhi Chand Jain may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
- List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
- |constituency = [[Barmer (Lok Sabha constituency|Barmer-Jaisalmer]]
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:55, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- Fixed — thanks, BracketBot Unician ∇ 19:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Okay
Ikin is back; I've scoured the history. DS (talk) 20:12, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- Ah, I didn't know that was an option — thanks! Unician ∇ 21:26, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
- It was only an option because you and the other editors had added so much material. So... good work! DS (talk) 23:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 25 June 2014
- News and notes: US National Archives enshrines Wikipedia in Open Government Plan
- Traffic report: Fake war, or real sport?
- Exclusive: "We need to be true to who we are": Foundation's new executive director speaks to the Signpost
- Discussion report: Media Viewer, old HTML tags
- Featured content: Showing our Wörth
- WikiProject report: The world where dreams come true
- Recent research: Power users and diversity in WikiProjects
Total prat
What a total prat you are. Giano (talk) 11:51, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
G7
If an editor blanks a page, and no other editor has contributed substantially, then it should be deleted under G7. So why did you replace the content of Bune District here? It turns out to be a straight copy of Buni Zom, and blanking it was one of the editor's more sensible edits. PamD 06:43, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
- The author of Bune District created the page, then blanked it only 28 minutes later, which seemed very odd. The page history showed that the pre-blanking content looked like a well-formed article, and the blanking itself had no edit summary, making it unclear if that action was deliberate or an accidental mis-edit which could lead to unintentional speedy deletion. Knowing that a deletion would not be trivial for the author to revert, I asked the author about the unusual blanking (here) and reverted the blanking as a precaution, knowing that my own edit would be trivial to revert, and leaving a well-formed article in the meantime — in other words, erring on the side of caution. Since the author never replied to my question, and since Bune District is a near duplicate of Buni Zom, I have no reason to contest speedy deletion now. If it would help the deletion procedure, I can revert my own edit. Unician ∇ 07:32, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 02 July 2014
- In the media: Wiki Education; medical content; PR firms
- Traffic report: The Cup runneth over... and over.
- News and notes: Wikimedia Israel receives Roaring Lion award
- Featured content: Ship-shape
- WikiProject report: Indigenous Peoples of North America
- Technology report: In memoriam: the Toolserver (2005–14)
The Signpost: 09 July 2014
- Special report: Wikimania 2014—what will it cost?
- Wikimedia in education: Exploring the United States and Canada with LiAnna Davis
- Featured content: Three cheers for featured pictures!
- News and notes: Echoes of the past haunt new conflict over tech initiative
- Traffic report: World Cup, Tim Howard rule the week
CHECKWIKI edit
Inquiring about this CHECKWIKI edit. From the reader's perspective the only visible effect is the removal of a useful color key from the bottom of the table. Please educate me, how does this improve the article? Mandruss (talk) 12:47, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
- I've changed that back. There seem to be two issues on a bigger scale than this edit. One, which is minor, is that the color chosen for concurrency rows may be too pale to be obvious. (It wasn't obvious to me.) The other, which is not as minor, is that explicitly starting a table in an article's wikisource, but then closing it inside a template, makes it hard to scan for tables which are really broken, which may be why CHECKWIKI has such a huge backlog of reported broken tables. I imagine that editors are reluctant to tackle such a long list knowing that most hits will be false alarms and thus wastes of time. We may need to add some new mechanism to help CHECKWIKI with that, and so help editors use their time effectively. Anyway, all of that is beyond the scope of this article and this edit. Thanks for pointing this out! Unician ∇ 23:17, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 July 2014
- Special report: $10 million lawsuit against Wikipedia editors withdrawn, but plaintiff intends to refile
- Traffic report: World Cup dominates for another week
- Wikimedia in education: Serbia takes the stage with Filip Maljkovic
- Featured content: The Island with the Golden Gun
Just a guess
I'm guessing you have discovered my funny stuff page. ;-) --I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 21:35, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 23 July 2014
- Wikimedia in education: Education program gaining momentum in Israel
- Traffic report: The World Cup hangs on, though tragedies seek to replace it
- News and notes: Institutional media uploads to Commons get a bit easier
- Featured content: Why, they're plum identical!
Talkback
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg/40px-Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg.png)
Message added 13:53, 27 July 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
ww2censor (talk) 13:53, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for voting on the Little Anita's AfD
It is very much appreciated. Another article, El Modelo, has been nominated for deletion under extremely similar circumstances. Smile Lee (talk) 14:57, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
- Also well-structured and well-sourced, and it also seems well-worth keeping. Shame I'm not nearby, it sounds like a place worth visiting.
Unician ∇ 16:42, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
- Its my home, but its also a genuinely beautiful place here's a music video on YouTube from a local band that will explain it better than I can. Thus far I've been through only sixteen of these beautiful United States, AL AR AZ CA CO GA HI LA MS NE NV NM SD TN TX UT. I hope to see more, particularly in the northeast such as DC, OH, NY, and ME. My goal is to see all of them, my Grandpa was a trucker so he got paid to see them all. Smile Lee (talk) 17:13, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Dear Unican,
I am a graphics artist, photographer and retired musician. I was co-founder and drummer of the band Cirith Ungol, and an owner and unofficial authority on the Ferrari Dino 308GT4. Since I have intimate, and first hand knowledge in these two areas I was trying to add enhanced content to these pages. As you have seen although an accomplished mac guy I am not that good at HTML. I was just trying to add some content to both pages and still have lots more to contribute but need to learn how to do it correctly. I couldn't even figure out a way to contact you. I am at [email protected] I was reading some of the instructiosn and even those are not so easy to understand. I would like some help but also am eager to learn how to edit these pages successfully! Thanks so much for you help |
Curious about blocked user name
Hello — Recently I reverted some vandalism from this user. A while later, you blocked that user for vandalism and for having an inappropriate user name. I hope you'll pardon my ignorance, but may I ask why that user name was thought to be improper? Since it doesn't seem to attack or threaten anyone, or impersonate another individual, or suggest use by a company or group, all I could guess was that it's an offensive local idiom. Google is usually good at revealing the latest slang — there is always some teenage Web user, somewhere, eager to etch their latest language inventions in stone by adding it to an online list — but Google turned up nothing more relevant than this. My apologies if this puts you in an awkward or embarrassing position, but could I buy a clue as to the (approximate) nature of the offense? Given that Wikipedia is a global discussion among multiple cultures, I'd rather know if there are new terms best not used in polite conversation. Thanks! Unician ∇ 09:16, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
BushyToaster88
Actually I had meant to block him solely as a vandalism-only account—the bot at UAA picked up on the "shyte" in the middle of the username, which was a false pos (although one could also be a little concerned about the "88" suffix, it's not enough to block on sight). I used the link from UAA to make the block, which unfortunately only gives you vaublock as a choice in that situation. I will go and change the block. Daniel Case (talk) 18:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
- Ah, thank you for the information, a bit of over-enthusiastic software at work. So I guess this image isn't some scandalous double entendre after all. Unician ∇ 14:00, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 30 July 2014
- Book review: Knowledge or unreality?
- Recent research: Shifting values in the paid content debate
- News and notes: How many more hoaxes will Wikipedia find?
- Wikimedia in education: Success in Egypt and the Arab World
- Traffic report: Doom and gloom vs. the power of Reddit
- Featured content: Skeletons and Skeltons
Disambiguation link notification for August 3
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Noa Dar Dance Group, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kibbutz Degania and San José. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:23, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
- This note was expected. In the cleanup of new article Noa Dar Dance Group, both links were to disambiguation pages because the original author provided neither the unambiguous locations of the events described, nor the sources where they could be rediscovered. Both links were created already tagged
{{clarify|reason=…}}
. Unician ∇ 11:23, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Historicity of Jesus
Thank you for the thank you. But all my suggested edits are being deleted and reverted. I requested external review to assess the material but other editors refused to wait. I escalated to dispute resolution. Would you please contribute at:
Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6c/Peacedove.svg/60px-Peacedove.svg.png)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!--IseeEwe (talk) 23:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Recent software changes
- You can now test a new tool to render wiki pages as PDF files. [1] [2] [3]
- You can now download an update to the archive of Wikimedia Commons files (uploaded up to December 31, 2013). If you have free space on your computer, please help preserve the files. [4]
Future software changes
- All Toolserver data will be deleted in September. If you want to back up your data, contact Toolserver administrators before August 31. [5]
07:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 06 August 2014
- Technology report: A technologist's Wikimania preview
- Traffic report: Ebola
- Featured content: Bottoms, asses, and the fairies that love them
- Wikimedia in education: Leading universities educate with Wikipedia in Mexico
Re: Skyhook (structure)
There has been a long history of content dispute regarding this article and the editor who posted the tag. That same editor has also been responsible for quite a bit of vandalism on the same article. Please investigate the history of this article for more information should you wish to get involved. Skyhook1 (talk) 18:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
- Skyhook1 Your continuing faking a positive review by Boeing is dishonest SPAM. Adhering to verifiability is not vandalism but responsible editing.BatteryIncluded (talk) 22:36, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
- Skyhook1, I'm not yet sure I want to get involved, but I did take your advice to look at the article history of Skyhook (structure), where I immediately noticed a striking pattern:
- BatteryIncluded added a cleanup concern here which you reverted here.
- 184.158.77.101 did a general cleanup here which you reverted here.
- I saved the lost cleanup tag here which you reverted here.
- and all of that was just within three hours.
- A day and a half before those,
- So while I do appreciate your heads-up about a particular editor you have disagreed with, it seems that recently you've reverted every contribution by every other editor. Since I'm new to the topic, rather than risk stirring up more controvery, I'll ask first: Could you briefly explain your overall plans for the article, and perhaps outline the kinds of contributions that would or would not get your veto? Perhaps that way we can all avoid a lot of reverting, which ends up with no net progress at all.
- Unician ∇ 23:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
- Skyhook1, I'm not yet sure I want to get involved, but I did take your advice to look at the article history of Skyhook (structure), where I immediately noticed a striking pattern:
- Thank you for asking and being willing to discuss this.
- Regarding other editors. There have been a number of other editors making edits to the article such as; Jonesey95, Andyhowlett, NuclearDuckie, and 92.32.80.56 who had all made positive contributions to the article. McSly also made what appeared to be a good faith revert of a new addition. His comments indicated that he had not really read the new addition but I took his comments to heart and did my best to rewrite the new addition to address his comments. So yes while I did revert his revert, I also rewrote that section to address his comments. I consider his comments and the resulting changes as an addition to the article.
- At 1600 Aug 9, BI added a tag to the article. At 1606 on Aug 9, 184.158.77.101 deleted 70% of the article. I checked the contributions of this editor and found that this is the one and only contribution ever made by this editor. The changes this editor made were very similar to past edits by BI and so I assumed that this new editor was a sock for BI and reverted it as well as BI's tag. That was when you got involved and that was when I started this message with you. Since then there have been some new messages on the Skyhook (structure) Talk page regarding this dispute that you might want to read.
- Regarding my plans for the article. My plans are very simple. I am attempting to create an article on skyhooks, both rotating and non-rotating, that is informative, up to date, fun to read, written so non-technical people can understand it and still be an information resource for technical people who are interested in this topic. When people ask questions, make comments, etc., I attempt to address those issues by adding more information to the article. Edits made by 92.32.80.56 and McSly are two examples of this. Skyhook1 (talk) 01:32, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
- FYI. I don't think you will be bothered any further, Unician. [6]. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 19:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
- I can see that this article has a history of entrenched controvery. I don't have sufficient time at present to trace all of its developments, which might not be helpful anyway, but I did notice one point which might explain a bit of the disagreement between editors. I considered adding this to the article Talk page earlier, but was unsure; now that someone else in the AN/I discussion has confirmed it, I have no reason to hesitate. See the most recent section at the bottom of the Talk page. (Spoiler: Wikipedia and Boeing are using conflicting definitions of the term “skyhook”; this makes it difficult to collaborate on an article when every usage of the crucial term “skyhook” has to be explained.) Unician ∇ 21:04, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
- I am quite aware that the current version of the article has a lot of room for improvement, and having a non-confrontational editing process is the only way to actually improve it. If the article remains stable for a while, I intend to again review his OR against the references and see what can be used. User Skyhook1 has the door open to contribute, as long as he understands that he is not writing an "fun article" for a magazine, but for Wikipedia, which has different requirements and style. I remember that he kept deleting the {{citation needed}} to many unreferenced statements, and terminology may have been one of those deleted. BatteryIncluded (talk) 13:14, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
- I can see that this article has a history of entrenched controvery. I don't have sufficient time at present to trace all of its developments, which might not be helpful anyway, but I did notice one point which might explain a bit of the disagreement between editors. I considered adding this to the article Talk page earlier, but was unsure; now that someone else in the AN/I discussion has confirmed it, I have no reason to hesitate. See the most recent section at the bottom of the Talk page. (Spoiler: Wikipedia and Boeing are using conflicting definitions of the term “skyhook”; this makes it difficult to collaborate on an article when every usage of the crucial term “skyhook” has to be explained.) Unician ∇ 21:04, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
It seems that user Skyhook1 may not have the door open to contribute after all. I can't say it's a big loss — while normally I'd regret the loss of so enthusiastic a contributor, for any topic, a single-purpose account with a username like that always had the smell of a conflict of interest. BatteryIncluded, you may have noticed that earlier in this thread, in my first response after Skyhook1 added this to my talk page and right after your first response, I phrased my text to imply that Skyhook1 has veto power over edits to the article, just to see the reaction. The optimist in me hoped to see a response like “oh no, I don't have veto power, no one owns the article”. Instead, the response (above) was to draw the lines between good guys and bad guys and to accuse you of sock-puppetry. Oh well, opportunity lost. The self-proclaimed Lone Voice of Truth act, fighting the good fight against the vast cabal of conspirators, got old fast. And then to invent a class of imaginary high school students as sock puppets, hoping that we wouldn't be as harsh if we thought we were speaking to children? Vug. (And then to stupidly squander whatever ill-gotten goodwill may have been achieved by giving the imaginary space-nerd kids a street gang attitude, “this is our turf now, we're the new consensus”? Double-vug. That's worse than just deceptive and manipulative; Skyhook1 is deceptive and manipulative and not even good at it.) So I cry no tears for the loss of a voice of disruption whose block was well earned. Thank you, admins, good call.
OK, end of venting.
I just noticed the article Momentum exchange tether, which I also see you have been active in building, although not as recently. It seems very similar to Skyhook (structure). I had previously found Space tether. And of course there's Space elevator. Is there an overall map as to the subject-area boundaries between these? There are several sets of criteria which could be used to divide the broad subject into individual articles, but it's not always obvious which criteria were chosen.
Unician ∇ 00:16, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
- Yes he had multiple opportunities to understand WP is not a blog but an encyclopedia with certain standards, but his attitude became a waste of his time. The reason I got drawn to these space tether articles, is because months ago Skyhook1 spammed a multitude of space-related articles with his "affordable by everyone" catchphrase. I attempted to cleanup and tone down the advert style, triggering his displeasure. In the process, I also noticed that terminology for the many other tether systems (articles) you mention is blurry, confusing and ill defined. Also, with the inconsistent use of upper case, the reader cannot tell if it is the generic name of the system or some kind of trade mark. My training and interest is more on the side of science than technology, so fixing all those articles would take more time studying the subject than I am willing to commit; I thought instead to make a request at the WikiProject Spaceflight to have that team assess the naming (nomenclature) of all those space tether systems and fix them. Any way, thank you for speaking your mind. Cheers, BatteryIncluded (talk) 13:36, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 15
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Forbidden Forest of the Upper Cibeet River, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Forbidden Forest. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:21, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
- Actually, that link was added by the article's creator, but it was still there when I edited the article, and I was probably the most recent editor when the dab bot noticed … now fixed. (and, yes, I do realize that, in talking to a bot, I'm talking to myself)
Unician ∇ 16:18, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Antisemitic publications
Per the current language at Category:Antisemitism "[this category] must not include articles about individuals, groups or media that are allegedly antisemitic." Everything on Wikipedia is just an allegation, since we deal with WP:V, not WP:TRUTH. Furthermore, publications are undoubtedly a form of media. This policy was recently reaffirmed by an RfC. If you disagree with the current consensus, please take the matter up at the talk page per WP:CCC. After 12 months of arguing against this policy, even enduring a one month block for daring to question such wording on a similar category, given the outcome of the aforementioned RfC I've finally decided to go with the flow. Carrying out the existing WP:Consensus of the project can't reasonably be categorized as disruptive.[7] In short: Wikipedia:Don't shoot the messenger. If you think the message should change, then more power to you. -- Kendrick7talk 03:19, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
- Kendrick7 — I'm not shooting the messenger. You were given no message to deliver. You are doing damage to the encyclopedia to make a point. Please don't do that. Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point.
- Yes, I know that the page for Category:Antisemitism contains some poorly-worded text about not branding people or organizations as anti-semites based only on allegations. I'm sorry if the choice of words is imperfect. Please use everyday common sense in interpreting that text. Your claim that “everything on Wikipedia is just an allegation” is disingenuous WP:Wikilawyering. You're better than that.
- I know that you tried to remove that very language from the text of the category, here, and were reverted, here. I'm sorry you didn't get your way. I would not have reverted your edit; in fact, I probably would have made your edit myself.
- I know there was an RFC here asking for consensus about that category. The RFC intro notes that, despite the controversial text, the category does, in fact, include groups and individuals, added by many editors over a long period of time. You know that, too, since you created the RFC and explicitly announced that fact.
- Many editors took the position support the status quo.
- The status quo is that actual practice interprets the instructions to permit the inclusion of groups and individuals in the category based on verifiable evidence from reliable sources.
- The RFC outcome was that there was no consensus to change, that is, there was consensus to maintain the status quo.
- So the consensus of all the past editors who added groups and individuals to this category is that doing so is appropriate, and now the recent RFC, in which all participants were aware of that actual practice, concluded that there is no groundswell of opinion to impose a change. I would strongly suggest following both indications of consensus and continue exactly as before. The category page should continue to contain the same text, and the category itself should continue to contain the same articles.
- In particular, there was no call for a mass purge of articles, and there was no decision to assign such a mission to you. In fact, a sudden and widespread change in the content of the category seems more a violation of the spirit of maintaining the status quo. You'll note that, although some editors who participated in the RFC opposed your position, they are not the ones now ripping out categories “guns a-blazing”.
- Are you conducting this self-invented mass purge because you're concerned about inconsistency between the text on the category page and the contents of the actual category? Here's a bigger question of inconsistency: Reliable sources. Take as an example the article about Fyodor Viktorovich Vinberg. A direct quote from a source tells us that “in all his writings Vinberg insists that one way or another the Jews must be got rid of”. Another direct quote, from a second and independent source, explains that “Vinberg is quite emphatic about this, the only solution is total physical extermination”. Reliable sources categorize this subject as anti-semitic beyond any rational doubt, and this article was already in Category:Antisemitism, yet you have now actively removed that categorization twice, contrary to the sources. What was that about Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth ? Are you really trying to claim that your own convenient reinterpretation of one word taken from one line of category-page text trumps one of the Wikipedia:core content policies of fidelity to the sources? Or are you trying to claim that this subject is not an example of antisemitism? In the words of an RFC contributor, that would be “a complete and total intellectual cop-out”.
- “When you wonder what should or should not be in an article, ask yourself what a reader would expect to find under the same heading in an encyclopedia.”
- Finally, I've read your comments to the RFC. I agree with your perspective. I cannot agree with your method. You're essentially threatening to continue harmful edits against the status quo unless, or until, concerned editors adopt your position (and priorities) and force your agenda. I would like to sincerely advise you that extortion is not a good way to gain support and convince the undecided.
- Now see. You've just spent all those words WP:SHOOTing the messenger. You are better than that. -- Kendrick7talk 00:43, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
User:Kendrick7, I really don't know why Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies can't be labelled as what it factually is, since doing so would not result in any "BLP" violation whatsoever... AnonMoos (talk) 04:24, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
- Again, if anyone believes the existing language should change, such that this should only be a WP:BLP concern, please take the matter up at the category talk page per WP:CCC. If the consensus changes, I will be more than happy to self-revert. I will otherwise plow on, deliberately, if slowly, in carrying out the existing and plain as day policy per the RfC. I no longer consider myself part of the equation. -- Kendrick7talk 06:37, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
- Kendrick7, you know that Wikipedia activity is visible from “outside”, from the non-Wikipedia world — in fact, you were mentioned, by (wiki)name, in an external published article. What are the columnists and bloggers going to tell the world when they see this edit? I doubt they'll be terribly interested in following the maze of twisty little links through an old CfD and to a new RFC, trying to keep track of all the various opinions and viewpoints, and picking up all the policy links left along the way like breadcrumbs marking the trail. More likely what they're going to write is something like
“Wikipedia decides that ‘Mein Kampf’ is no longer an ‘Antisemitic publication’ ”.
Or perhaps they'll also see this edit, which you've just made today, and conclude that it's a much bigger conspiracy, that
“Wikipedia's Revisionist History Trying to Whitewash Anti-Semitism”.
That's certainly what it looks like.
- Kendrick7, you know that Wikipedia activity is visible from “outside”, from the non-Wikipedia world — in fact, you were mentioned, by (wiki)name, in an external published article. What are the columnists and bloggers going to tell the world when they see this edit? I doubt they'll be terribly interested in following the maze of twisty little links through an old CfD and to a new RFC, trying to keep track of all the various opinions and viewpoints, and picking up all the policy links left along the way like breadcrumbs marking the trail. More likely what they're going to write is something like
- Aren't there various guidelines about not bringing the project into disrepute?
- Oh, and then the outside writers will look here. I have a bad feeling about this.
- Finally, this is not the first time you've been alerted to this danger. Nunh-huh made the same point on your own talk page about three weeks ago, and you acknowledged the risk in your response. And now you're doing it again, on a massive scale.
- Getting back to the main point: You've repeatedly claimed that you're acting on the results of an RFC, but no one else sees the RFC results that you imagine. Among all the participants in that RFC, no one else is doing this. I asked the administrator who closed that RFC, Sandstein (here), if I'm just confused about its conclusion. Not only did he confirm that there is no mandate to depopulate categories, he also mentioned that he'd already told you that. I checked, and he did — moreover, he told you twice, and it was a conversation that you started.
- So from where are you getting the idea that, after an RFC which ended with the consensus to do nothing new, the category discussed should instead be vigorously depopulated? And, worse, where do you get the idea that other categories should be similarly depopulated, even in contradiction to their own instructions?
- Once more, I ask that you WP:do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point.
- Although I agree Kendrick7's conduct has been unhelpful on this, I think you're misreading the outcome of the various discussions, not least because the RFC was badly worded and focused purely on the instructions making the outcome implicit rather than explicit. Given the user history of misrepresenting closures and putting nonsense opinions onto the admins I can understand the closer of that one choosing to only focus on the specific worded question of removing the instructions and not giving endorsement to an editor fearing their third block in a year on the subject even though it leaves the broader point of what to do about articles currently in the category that go against it.
- The position set by the CFD is that all biography and organisation articles cannot be included in bias categories. Users felt that although there are some clear cut cases, there are many where the sources are divided, the accusations are thrown around freely and the category turns into a black & white statement whereas the article text can be more nuanced. And they don't feel there's a clear line that can be drawn that would allow common sense to rule the day without massive edit warring, source warring and subjective decision making. (That may have changed since 2011 but it's clear from the RFC that a lot of users also feel strongly that a consistent approach should be taken with such categories rather than have a situation where, say, it's possible to categorise one person in Category:Anti-Semitism but not another in Category:Anti-Islam. Attempts to pick off individual categories are just adding to the problems.)
- Since the RFC was focused on the instructions governing the category, support for the status quo clearly means for the instructions rather than inclusion. Nobody was arguing the double position for both the articles to be included but the instructions to be retained. The categories do need tidying up but slowly and with careful wording, not a guns blazing approach.
- If you either disagree with the close of the original CFDs or feel that the consensus should be addressed anew feel free to launch a review discussion or a new one - but if the latter please address the whole area of bias categories and not just repeat the mess of going for individual ones. Timrollpickering (talk) 23:54, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
- "Given the user history of misrepresenting closures and putting nonsense opinions onto the admins" Examples please? -- Kendrick7talk 06:16, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- Timrollpickering, thank you for your feedback. I appreciate the time and effort you invested into providing a more complete picture of the situation.
- "Given the user history of misrepresenting closures and putting nonsense opinions onto the admins" Examples please? -- Kendrick7talk 06:16, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- I agree that the wording of the RFC was deeply flawed. A major problem with an outcome being “implicit rather than explicit” is that there is then some interpretation to be made on the part of the reader, with the potential to be interpreted in an unexpected and/or extreme way depending on the individual. I believe that is what we're seeing now.
- I'm not familiar with a user's “history of misrepresenting closures” and “fearing their third block in a year on the subject”. Are you telling me that the same editor who I believe is acting now based on a misrepresentation has done some of the same things before, and been blocked for it, more than once? The consistency is good to know, even if the track record is disappointing.
- (If it matters, it is not my goal to get that editor blocked again.)
- You summarized the 2011 CFD as “biography and organisation articles cannot be included in bias categories”. The 2014 RFC dealt explicitly with Category:Antisemitism. One of my concerns is that Kendrick7 is altering articles which are neither biography nor organisation articles and deleting categories which are not Category:Antisemitism. No formal consensus discussion seems to suggest that such is appropriate, and certainly not via the “guns a-blazing” approach.
- @Kendrick7 For starters "one Admin has decided for all time that no one alive is, in fact, opposed to the Catholic Church,"[8]. And then there's the bizarre claim a bot automatically removing the RFC notice after one month "decided that Hitler wasn't an anti-Semite"[9].
- @Unician The 2011 CFD is clear on a global approach and that's the status quo ante but once again we come back to the terrible drafting on the 2014 RFC which didn't even address sub-categories of Category:Anti-Semitism and so just adds to the confusion. If you look through User talk:Kendrick7 you'll see blocks and topic bans for editwarring in this area, mainly on anti-Catholicism and one author. Timrollpickering (talk) 11:15, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- Timrollpickering, yes, exactly, the recent RFC did not cover sub-categories. The 2011 CFD may be global, but applies to articles about people and organizations. My particular concern at the moment is that our colleague Kendrick7 is removing articles from Category:Antisemitic publications, articles which are not about people or organizations, which are not in Category:Anti-Semitism, and which do not fall under either formal discussion. (I identified 40 such removals before I stopped counting.) I can see no justification to do that. Unician ∇ 12:48, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Please review the opening post of the RfC. My bold: Should Category:Antisemitism and its various subcategories, per this 2011 CFD, continue to include the language that "It must not include articles about individuals, groups or media that are allegedly antisemitic" despite the reality that it does, in practice, include individuals and groups that are, per WP:V and WP:RS, allegedly antisemitic? Perhaps that was poorly worded, but it's silly season to insist that the restriction should, for example, only apply to individuals, groups, or media which are stateless, and not to subcategories such as, for example Antisemitism in France and so on. If you look at the RfC discussion, I frequently cited Hitler as a prime example, although he was actually in Category:Antisemitism in Germany at the time, so I think it fairly obvious that subcategories were in play. Nevertheless, I've tried not to be too careless with the (fairly slow, considering) purge; I've made mistakes and thanked several editors for catching them. I admit, media wasn't first in anyone's mind during the RfC, but publications are clearly media, publishers are clearly groups, etc. Sure, I got sucked into this whole quagmire by an obtuse angle[10] (and, God willing, I will RfC that matter next) but this still isn't about me. -- Kendrick7talk 03:30, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Kendrick7, thank you for the idea of selective bolding. The RFC asked if categories and subcategories should “continue to include the language”. But all of the subcategories manifestly did not, and do not, include that language; it was impossible for them to “continue” doing what they had never done before. The RFC started with an invalid and provably-false assumption; it's unfortunate that it wasn't corrected at the time, but it remains false, and it's not clear that any action to alter the encyclopedia can follow from an invalid premise.
- In fact, some of the more specific subcategories use language which explicitly invites articles about individuals; for example, Category:Holocaust deniers “is reserved for articles on people who have actively promoted Holocaust denial”. I still think it's odd that you so zealously push for a result that you so vigorously disagree with, but here, the RFC conclusion that there is no consensus to change instructions may be fortunate.
- As for what you may have contributed as a concerned editor during the RFC process, I appreciate your input, and IIRC I generally agreed with you, but just because you were the creator of the RFC doesn't mean that the question under discussion changed every time you added a coment. The RFC presented what it presented, and by now it seems that everyone, including yourself, agrees that the wording was deeply flawed. At what point do we just declare that the RFC was too broken to have ever had a chance to yield a clear, unambiguous, and actionable consensus? When do we admit that it was a misfire, and that we have to either do it again or ignore it as a failed attempt and return to the 2011 baseline?
- Unician ∇ 07:51, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- I'm actually moving things toward the 2011 baseline, per the original CfD and subsequent discussion. Nevertheless, I can admit that my wording was flawed, and that the whole process was flawed considering that the closing admin has repeatedly claimed he had no idea what he was signing off on. By all means, relist -- Kendrick7talk 04:25, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
First impressions of Omega Marine Chronometer
Hello —
I'm glad we now have an article on this historic instrument, thank you!
I realize that this is still a brand-new article, less than 24 hours old, and despite looking so polished, may still have the occasional rough edge to be addressed. Rather than trying to fiddle myself, in any major way, with a work-in-progress, may I mention some issues here?
- In being so enthusiastic, the prose seems a bit promotional, using terms like “unrivaled” and “revolutionary”. Mentioning that it is one of very few models of wristwatch to meet the standards of a Marine Chronometer is, of course, essential, as that is its signature achievement and the source of its name; but it might not be necessary to repeat that twice in the introduction.
- By the way, was Omega the first to fit Marine Chronometer accuracy into a wristwatch? or at least into a wristwatch in regular production? If you run into a reliable source to confirm that, it would be a nice addition to the article.
- You've documented each source in its entirety, each time it's cited, which is not wrong but which really isn't necessary. There are at least two styles of references well supported by Wikipedia which only need one full description of each source, each of which can then be cited as many times as appropriate. The style I would usually choose for this is named references; the other style that comes to mind is short citations (which then, in turn, refer to full citations). There may be others. The choice is mostly one of personal preference. This is definitely a lower priority than perfecting the prose content of the article, but it's something to keep in mind to make the job of editing a bit easier.
- The images included in the article are abundant, are of high quality, and seem to cover the subject very well, from rare factory prototypes through production models, including variations and derivatives. All of that is wonderful, and exactly what one would hope for in a complete article, but ...
- Wikipedia has a history of (usually well-intentioned novice) editors copying images from other Web sites and uploading them here for inclusion in Wikipedia articles. I couldn't guess how many real-world attorneys have contacted the Wikimedia parent organization about copyright violations, but I do know that today Wikipedia has strict rules about images and copyrights.
- For this article, you've uploaded eight images and tagged them as your original work, identifying yourself as the copyright holder. The excellent quality of the images suggests the work of a professional photographer. Those images cover (if I've counted correctly) six different examples of this “exotic” timepiece, including two (of the five) especially-rare factory prototypes. There will almost certainly be challenges to your claim that these are original images for which you hold the copyright.
- Personally, I know that an enthusiastic adult collector could have six (or more) of these chronometers in their lifetime collection, at once or over time, and that taking high-quality photographs of such a museum-quality collection (or commissioning such photography) would not be unusual at all, and may even be a requirement for proper insurance. But the number of such high-end collectors is small, and, for Wikipedia, is overwhelmed by the much larger number of youthful users uploading images of their favorite television celebrities taken from media Websites without regard to ownership or copyright. I suspect that most Wikipedia editors, seeing such professional photographs of rare items, will find it more plausible that they were copied from elsewhere. You might want to think about ways to verify your ownership of those images, an area where I don't have personal experience from which to draw suggestions.
Again, thank you for creating this article. There are a few minor tweaks that I feel I can make myself, but that shouldn't cause any disruption to your good work.
Unician ∇ 19:57, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing my article
Hi Unician
Thanks for the message on my article, I am in the process of writing numerous other articles on historic Omega but this is my first foray away from forum communities and in to wikipedia so your feedback is invaluable and I will of course take it on board.
Interesting feedback about the images, I am actually the second owner of the rare factory prototype, my name is Tom and if you google dickstar1977 you will see numerous web articles from me on these watches. I am (humbly) perhaps one of the most prolific collectors of megaquartz watches there is, I currently own 12 working examples of the 2400 series watches and a further 6 watches in spares or incomplete, in the last eight years I have owned a further 18, one of which is the prototype in my article, which is now on display at Swiss Time Services in the UK.
The images are all my own taken by me using a light box and the photoshop retouched for consistency, so thanks for your feedback on their professionalism. That said I am fortune that I collect watches, work in academia but have background in photography and film making in my early days
Anyway, again thanks for your feedback and I will review my article appropriately
Finally apologies if this is the wrong way in which to communicate but as you can see I am very new to wikipedia
Very best wishes Tom (my direct email is [email protected]), I assure you that my next subsequent articles will only improve on what I have already started. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omega-collector (talk • contribs) 08:36, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
- Ah, I had seen some of your forum postings, and you were actually who I suspected was the Wikipedia username Omega-collector, simply because I didn't think there could be very many alternatives — especially after reading your story about eBay, climbing down from the roof, and finding you'd won one of the five factory prototypes.
- I thought the photos seemed professional based mostly on the lighting; a watch crystal offers all sorts of opportunities to get unwanted glare and reflections in the image, and a thick case casts shadows along the edges away from the light source; your photos mostly avoid all of those, but without making the whole subject look flat (for example, there's still shading to show the curve of bracelet links, or a touch of reflection of the knurled crown on the case). Nicely done!
- Yes, this is exactly how to communicate. The only think I'd suggest is, when starting a new topic or discussion thread, use the option at the very top of the page labeled “New section”, so that your new edit doesn't get the title of the (unrelated) previous topic. When replying at the end of an existing discussion, the usual convention is to indent a bit with every reply, as I'm doing here. Either way, sign at the bottom of your text with four tilde characters in a row, which the Wikipedia software replaces with the signature you're using.
- As for improving your articles with time, I have to say that you're off to an excellent start, so you're setting yourself a difficult task to exceed it.
Hi Unican
Thanks for the message, just about to upload the beta 21 Electroquartz article, just need to get home from Spain and add in the relevant references! Assuming you are also an Omega collector? Could I ask you name?
Best wishes Tom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omega-collector (talk • contribs) 12:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Talkback
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg/40px-Nuvola_apps_edu_languages.svg.png)
Message added 21:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
—Farix (t | c) 21:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 13 August 2014
- Special report: Twitter bots catalogue government edits to Wikipedia
- Traffic report: Disease, decimation and distraction
- Wikimedia in education: Global Education: WMF's Perspective
- Wikimania: Promised the moon, settled for the stars
- News and notes: Media Viewer controversy spreads to German Wikipedia
- In the media: Monkey selfie, net neutrality, and hoaxes
- Featured content: Cambridge got a lot of attention this week
Recent software changes
- There is a new protection level called superprotection. At the moment, only some Wikimedia Foundation employees have access to it. Administrators can't edit "superprotected" pages. [11] [12] [13]
- You can now create empty pages directly. A message asks you to confirm that you want to create an empty page. [14] [15]
- You can search for Wikimedia tools using a new list of tools. [16]
Wikidata
07:17, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, and an answer to your question
Hi Unican! Thank you for reviewing my material and for your inquiry about the username. It's named "Food Allergy Experts" because we are a group of board members from FAAN (now FARE), the nation's largest non-profit food allergy resource. Therefore we think it's appropriate to utilize this name. Please advise: does that explain our decision? Or wouyld you still like us to come up with a different username? We aim to please ,and are striving towards a food allergy solution.
Thank you again. Food Allergy Experts, USA (talk) 16:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 20 August 2014
- Traffic report: Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero
- WikiProject report: Bats and gloves
- Op-ed: A new metric for Wikimedia
- Featured content: English Wikipedia departs for Japan
Checking in - question
Hello, we're thrilled you are editing our page. Thank you! We'd asked if we needed to make a name change - with an explanation why we selected the name "Food Allergy Experts, USA". May you please kindly advise if we are all set with our current name, or if you believe it's in our best interest to make a change? THANK YOU! We appreciate your time & editing skills. Food Allergy Experts, USA (talk) 21:50, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- Hello Food Allergy Experts, USA — Sorry I didn't get back to you earlier, but I'm just a volunteer editor like everyone else, and sometimes can't be online here at all times. Let me see if I can explain the issue of user names on Wikipedia.
- The basic standard is that Wikipedia editors are individuals, people such as myself who find Wikipedia useful and important and want to contribute some enthusiasm and effort to it. That's where your account name runs into problems. To me, and probably to most other editors, “Food Allergy Experts, USA” sounds a lot like the name of an organization, or a company, or some other kind of group or association. It doesn't sound like it represents an individual. On Wikipedia, account names which appear to represent organizations, rather than individuals, are routinely asked to switch to more appropriate names. (And, peeking at your own talk page, I see that an administrator has already made that request.) This is absolutely not a judgement about your organization, it's just the convention that Wikipedia follows, and it's not all that unusual; in the dusty back rooms of Wikipedia, there's a closet with something like 100,000 account names in the same category.
- My informal suggestions would be, first, check the guidelines on user account names found at Wikipedia:Username policy, and second, create individual Wikipedia account names for any or all individuals who want to contribute to Wikipedia. (As you've already seen, they're free, don't require personal information, and there is generally no problem with several people editing Wikipedia at the same time.) Having an organizational name blocked is not a moral judgement or a black mark against you, and should not prevent you from moving forward. If you wish, you can also have one individual user account inherit the records of the previous account by asking the admins to rename “Food Allergy Experts, USA” to that name, then creating the other individual user names “from scratch”. (The admin's notice to you at the bottom of your talk page offers instructions on how to do that.) As with any online community, you may want to be cautious about how much personal information you do disclose — for example, using individual real names as account names isn't terribly common.
- I hope this information is helpful. If you have any questions, please ask as you did before, and I'll try to get an answer back to you more quickly.
Unician ∇ 08:01, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Future software changes
- The latest version of MediaWiki (1.24wmf18) is on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since August 21. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis on August 26, and on all Wikipedias on August 28 (calendar).
- After August 26, you will have a central JavaScript and CSS page. They will be on Meta-Wiki and will work on all wikis. Read more on the help page. [19]
09:21, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 August 2014
- In the media: Plagiarism and vandalism dominate Wikipedia news
- News and notes: Media Viewer—Wikimedia's emotional roller-coaster
- Traffic report: Viral
- Featured content: Cheats at Featured Pictures!
Recent software changes
- You can now search pages that link to a page. Use the
linksto:
keyword in your search. [20] [21] - A redirect to a section now changes the URL in the address bar of your browser. If "Dog" redirects to "Animals#Dog", you now see "Animals#Dog" instead of "Dog#Dog". [22] [23]
Future software changes
- There is a proposal to build a database on Commons for file data. It will make it easier to see the author, license and topics. You can give feedback on this idea. You can also come to the IRC chat on September 3 at 18:00 (UTC) in
#wikimedia-office
at freenode. [24] - You can give feedback on Media Viewer until September 7. You can say what needs to be improved and ask other people to give feedback too. [25]
- You can test a new version of the tool to show math. It uses MathML. Report bugs in bugzilla.
- You will no longer be able to upload images from the mobile site. [26]
07:49, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks
I've raised all this at Wikipedia talk:Categorization. Dougweller (talk) 13:44, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 03 September 2014
- Arbitration report: Media viewer case is suspended
- Featured content: 1882 × 5 in gold, and thruppence more
- Traffic report: Holding Pattern
- WikiProject report: Gray's Anatomy (v. 2)
09:33, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 10 September 2014
- Traffic report: Refuge in celebrity
- Featured content: The louse and the fish's tongue
- WikiProject report: Checking that everything's all right
Recent software changes
- You can now change the style of links to disambiguation pages. This is done with the
mw-disambig
CSS class. [29] [30] - New users are randomly chosen for a test on 12 Wikipedias. They get messages with ideas of articles to edit. The ideas come from what they have already edited. [31]
08:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 17 September 2014
- WikiProject report: A trip up north to Scotland
- News and notes: Wikipedia's traffic statistics are off by nearly one-third
- Traffic report: Tolstoy leads a varied pack
- Featured content: Which is not like the others?
09:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Buckingham Palace infobox
Hi, I've restarted a discussion on the talk page of Buckingham Palace concerning whether or not the page needs an infobox (Here). I noticed you were previously part of this discussion, so any input from you at this point would be much appreciated. Sotakeit (talk) 16:29, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 24 September 2014
- Featured content: Oil paintings galore
- Recent research: 99.25% of Wikipedia birthdates accurate; focused Wikipedians live longer; merging WordNet, Wikipedia and Wiktionary
- Traffic report: Wikipedia watches the referendum in Scotland
- WikiProject report: GAN reviewers take note: competition time
- Arbitration report: Banning Policy, Gender Gap, and Waldorf education
Recent software changes
- On Commons, you can now see what files are most used across all wikis. You can also see the same list for deleted or uncreated files. [36] [37]
Software changes this week
- Errors from Scribunto (Lua) are now shown on the page. Before, you had to click on "Script error" to see them. [38] [39]
- You can add an "autovalue" for a field in TemplateData. When users add the template to a page, the value will be added automatically. An example is when a clean-up template shows the date it was added. [40]
- If you change a user preference but don't save it, it now asks if you want to save it. [41] [42]
- The PDF export tool has changed. The new one has better language support but it doesn't offer ZIM and EPUB formats. [43]
Future changes
- You can watch a video showing Phabricator, the new tool to track bugs. You can also read more about the move from Bugzilla.
- JavaScript authors: Many old methods will be removed soon. Please check your scripts and gadgets and replace the old methods by the new ones if needed. [44]
09:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 01 October 2014
- From the editor: The Signpost needs your help
- Dispatches: Let's get serious about plagiarism
- WikiProject report: Animals, farms, forests, USDA? It must be WikiProject Agriculture
- Traffic report: Shanah Tovah
- Featured content: Brothers at War
Recent changes
- You can use the
phab:
andphabricator:
interwikis to link to https://phabricator.wikimedia.org. [45] [46] - You can look at Special:MediaStatistics to see what kind of files are on your wiki. [47]
- A new tool can now create thumbnails of large TIFF images. This concerns files larger than 50 megapixels. These thumbnails are also sharpened. You can comment on Commons. [48]
06:10, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 08 October 2014
- In the media: Opposition research firm blocked; Australian bushfires
- Featured content: From a wordless novel to a coat of arms via New York City
- Traffic report: Panic and denial
- Technology report: HHVM is the greatest thing since sliced bread
Meetings
- There is a proposal to organize file pages better. It would use the same tools as Wikidata. You can join a meeting about it on October 16, 2014 at 18:00 (UTC). [49]
08:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 15 October 2014
- Op-ed: Ships—sexist or sexy?
- Arbitration report: One case closed and two opened
- Featured content: Bells ring out at the Temple of the Dragon at Peace
- Technology report: Attempting to parse wikitext
- Traffic report: Now introducing ... mobile data
- WikiProject report: Signpost reaches the Midwest
Recent changes
- You can test a new system to see math using MathML. Go to your display options and choose "⧼mw math mathml⧽".
- You can add badges in Wikidata for quality articles and featured lists. [50] [51]
File information cleanup
- You can join a wiki project to help tools read file information. It will help people reuse files.
- See how to fix metadata. You can fix it by adding markers to templates and adding templates to files.
- You can see a list of files missing machine-readable information on your wiki.
- The files missing readable data are also in these categories: no license, no description, no author or no source. [52]
Changes this week
- 10% of logged-out readers are getting pages from servers that run the HHVM tool. HHVM should make pages load faster. You can also test it as a Beta Feature. [53]
- If you add the same parameter twice in a template, it now puts the page in a tracking category. [54] [55]
13:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 22 October 2014
- Featured content: Admiral on deck: a modern Ada Lovelace
- Traffic report: Death, War, Pestilence... Movies and TV
- WikiProject report: De-orphanning articles—a huge task but with a huge team of volunteers to help
Problems
- There was an issue with files from Commons on October 21. You could only see those with names between 140 and 159 characters by visiting Commons itself. [56]
05:20, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 29 October 2014
- Featured content: Go West, young man
- In the media: Wikipedia a trusted source on Ebola; Wikipedia study labeled government waste; football biography goes viral
- Maps tagathon: Find 10,000 digitised maps this weekend
- Traffic report: Ebola, Ultron, and Creepy Articles
Recent software changes
- The "Special:Cite" page is now called "Special:CiteThisPage". That way, you know it's to cite the page, not to add a reference. [57]
Software changes this week
17:28, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 05 November 2014
- In the media: Predicting the flu, MH17 conspiracy theories
- Traffic report: Sweet dreams on Halloween
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent software changes
- You may see a new tool on the mobile site of the English Wikipedia. It asks simple questions to make the article better. In the future, your answers will go to Wikidata. [60] [61]
- The MediaWiki API now shows information in a nice format. You can translate it in translatewiki.net. [62]
- Reminder: You can help fix file information on your wiki. It will help robots understand the information. After that, it will be easier for you to search files and re-use them.
- You can join two IRC chats this week to learn more about the file cleanup project. One will be on Wednesday at 18:00 (UTC) and the other on Thursday at 04:00 (UTC). You can ask questions during the chat if you need help to fix files on your wiki.
- You can see a list of files to fix on the Labs tool. You can report bugs and ask questions on the talk page.
Problems
- Wikimedia Labs was broken for a few hours on Thursday. It was due to a hardware problem. [63]
Software changes this week
- The new version of MediaWiki (1.25wmf7) has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since November 5. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from November 11, and on all Wikipedias from November 12 (calendar).
- You can now use more editing tools for tables in VisualEditor. You can add rows and columns, merge cells, and edit table captions. [64] [65]
- The style and insert menus in the toolbar of VisualEditor now show fewer tools. This helps you see the most common tasks. You can see all items by clicking "More". [66]
- The way windows inside VisualEditor work has changed. VisualEditor should be faster and have fewer bugs. [67]
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
15:00, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 12 November 2014
- In the media: Amazon Echo; EU freedom of panorama; Bluebeard's Castle
- Traffic report: Holidays, anyone?
- Featured content: Wikipedia goes to church in Lithuania
- WikiProject report: Talking hospitals
Software changes this week
- The new search tool ("CirrusSearch") will be on the English Wikipedia from November 19. [68]
18:28, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 26 November 2014
- Featured content: Orbital Science: Now you're thinking with explosions
- WikiProject report: Back with the military historians
- Traffic report: Big in Japan
The Signpost: 03 December 2014
- In the media: Embroidery and cheese
- Featured content: ABCD: Any Body Can Dance!
- Traffic report: Turkey and a movie
- WikiProject report: Today on the island
17:11, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 10 December 2014
- Op-ed: It's GLAM up North!
- Traffic report: Dead Black Men and Science Fiction
- Featured content: Honour him, love and obey? Good idea with military leaders.
16:44, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 17 December 2014
- Arbitration report: Arbitration Committee election results
- Featured content: Tripping hither, tripping thither, Nobody knows why or whither; We must dance and we must sing, Round about our fairy ring!
- Traffic report: A December Lull
Future changes
- The system that displays citations will change in the future. The new system will not change the style of citations. [72]
16:52, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 24 December 2014
- From the editor: Looking for new editors-in-chief
- In the media: Wales on GamerGate
- Featured content: Still quoting Iolanthe, apparently.
- WikiProject report: Microsoft does The Signpost
- Traffic report: North Korea is not pleased
The Signpost: 31 December 2014
- News and notes: The next big step for Wikidata—forming a hub for researchers
- In the media: Study tour controversy; class tackles the gender gap
- Traffic report: Surfin' the Yuletide
- Featured content: A bit fruity
The Signpost: 07 January 2015
- In the media: ISIL propaganda video; AirAsia complaints
- Featured content: Kock up
- Traffic report: Auld Lang Syne
Recent software changes
- You can now use the
{{!}}
magic word instead of Template:!. Many wikis used the template to create a pipe (|
) in tables and templates. You can delete the template. [73]
16:47, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 14 January 2015
- WikiProject report: Articles for creation: the inside story
- News and notes: Erasmus Prize recognizes the global Wikipedia community
- Featured content: Citations are needed
- Traffic report: Wikipédia sommes Charlie
The Signpost: 21 January 2015
- From the editor: Introducing your new editors-in-chief
- Anniversary: A decade of the Signpost
- News and notes: Annual report released; Wikimania; steward elections
- In the media: Johann Hari; bandishes and delicate flowers
- Featured content: Yachts, marmots, boat races, and a rocket engineer who attempted to birth a goddess
- Arbitration report: As one door closes, a (Gamer)Gate opens
Future changes
- You can join a project to improve WikiProjects. [74]
16:08, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 January 2015
- From the editor: An editorial board that includes you
- In the media: A murderous week for Wikipedia
- Traffic report: A sea of faces
The Signpost: 04 February 2015
- Op-ed: Is Wikipedia for sale?
- In the media: Gamergate and Muhammad controversies continue
- Traffic report: The American Heartland
- Featured content: It's raining men!
- Arbitration report: Slamming shut the GamerGate
- WikiProject report: Dicing with death – on Wikipedia?
- Technology report: Security issue fixed; VisualEditor changes
- Gallery: Langston Hughes
Recent software changes
- You can now use
{{#lsth: PageName | SectionName }}
to transclude a section with its title. [75]
Software changes this week
- You can have one user page for all wikis. Your Meta user page will show if you don't have a user page on a wiki. You can test this tool on test wikis. [76] [77] [78]
Future changes
- Administrators will soon be able to delete change tags used fewer than 5,000 times. [79]
16:27, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 11 February 2015
- From the editors: We want to know what you think!
- In the media: Is Wikipedia eating itself?
- Featured content: A grizzly bear, Operation Mascot, Freedom Planet & Liberty Island, cosmic dust clouds, a cricket five-wicket list, more fine art, & a terrible, terrible opera...
- Traffic report: Bowled over
- WikiProject report: Brand new WikiProjects profiled
- Gallery: Feel the love
Software changes this week
- On Wednesday your Meta user page will be shown if you don't have a user page on a wiki. [80] [81] [82]
17:57, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 18 February 2015
- In the media: Students' use and perception of Wikipedia
- Special report: Revision scoring as a service
- Gallery: Darwin Day
- Traffic report: February is for lovers
- Featured content: A load of bull-sized breakfast behind the restaurant, Koi feeding, a moray eel, Spaghetti Nebula and other fishy, fishy fish
- Arbitration report: We've built the nuclear reactor; now what colour should we paint the bikeshed?
Recent software changes
- All new accounts are now global. [83]
- Your Meta user page is now shown if you don't have a user page on a wiki. You can report problems if you see any. You can ask a bot to delete your old user pages. [84] [85] [86]
16:29, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 25 February 2015
- News and notes: Questions raised over WMF partnership with research firm
- In the media: WikiGnomes and Bigfoot
- Gallery: Far from home
- Traffic report: Fifty Shades of... self-denial?
- Recent research: Gender bias, SOPA blackout, and a student assignment that backfired
- WikiProject report: Be prepared... Scouts in the spotlight
The Signpost: 25 February 2015
- News and notes: Questions raised over WMF partnership with research firm
- In the media: WikiGnomes and Bigfoot
- Gallery: Far from home
- Traffic report: Fifty Shades of... self-denial?
- Recent research: Gender bias, SOPA blackout, and a student assignment that backfired
- WikiProject report: Be prepared... Scouts in the spotlight
Recent software changes
- A Lua function to use Wikidata has changed. You need to update the pages that use it. [87]
- You can now hide banners if you don't have an account. [88] [89]
Future changes
- You will be able to get a direct link for a section of a page. [90]
16:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 04 March 2015
- From the editor: A sign of the times: the Signpost revamps its internal structure to make contributing easier
- Traffic report: Attack of the movies
- Arbitration report: Bradspeaks—impact, regrets, and advice; current cases hinge on sex, religion, and ... infoboxes
- Interview: Meet a paid editor
- Featured content: Ploughing fields and trading horses with Rosa Bonheur
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Future changes
- You can get help to become a developer. You can learn more on the Google Summer of Code and Outreachy pages. [91]
- You will soon be able to read technical reports in Phabricator. [92]
15:19, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 11 March 2015
- Special report: An advance look at the WMF's fundraising survey
- In the media: Gamergate; a Wiki hoax; Kanye West
- Traffic report: Wikipedia: handing knowledge to the world, one prank at a time
- Featured content: Here they come, the couple plighted –
- Op-ed: Why the Core Contest matters
Recent changes
- The servers that resize images are using new software. You should report new problems that you notice with images. [93]
Changes this week
Future changes
- The list of bad user names on your wiki will no longer work. The global list will replace it. You can ask to add rules for bad user names on Meta. [96] [97]
- The final steps of single user login (SUL) will happen in April. You can see the rules to rename accounts. [98]
15:15, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 18 March 2015
- From the editor: A salute to Pine
- Featured content: A woman who loved kings
- Traffic report: It's not cricket
.
Changes this week
- The text of a reference is now more visible when you click on it. It has a blue background. Many wikis already have the blue color. Those wikis can now remove it from their CSS page. [99]
Future changes
- Talk pages using "LiquidThreads" on mediawiki.org will soon use the new system. [100]
15:10, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost – Volume 11, Issue 12 – 25 March 2015
- News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation adopts open-access research policy
- Featured content: A carnival of animals, a river of dung, a wasteland of uncles, and some people with attitude
- Special report: Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year 2014
- Traffic report: Oddly familiar
- Recent research: Most important people; respiratory reliability; academic attitudes
15:18, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost, 1 April 2015
- In the media: Wiki-PR duo bulldoze a piñata store; Wifione arbitration case; French parliamentary plagiarism
- Featured content: Stop Press. Marie Celeste Mystery Solved. Crew Found Hiding In Wardrobe.
- Traffic report: All over the place
- Special report: Pictures of the Year 2015
The Signpost: 01 April 2015
- In the media: Wiki-PR duo bulldoze a piñata store; Wifione arbitration case; French parliamentary plagiarism
- Featured content: Stop Press. Marie Celeste Mystery Solved. Crew Found Hiding In Wardrobe.
- Traffic report: All over the place
- Special report: Pictures of the Year 2015
Recent changes
- You can read the last monthly report. In the future you can read team reports every three months. You can see current work on the roadmap. [103] [104]
- The number of articles in Special:Statistics is now updated once a month. [105]
15:42, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 08 April 2015
- Traffic report: Resurrection week
- Featured content: Partisan arrangements, dodgy dollars, a mysterious union of strings, and a hole that became a monument
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Christianity
- Arbitration report: New Functionary appointments
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Recent changes
- The list of bad user names on your wiki no longer works. The global list replaces it. You can ask to add rules for bad user names on Meta. [106] [107]
Changes this week
- Developers will start to rename 1.5 million accounts on Wednesday. After that all accounts will be unique and will work on all wikis. [108] [109]
- All users can now test link previews ("Hovercards") on several Wikipedias. [110]
16:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 15 April 2015
- Traffic report: Furious domination
Recent changes
- If you write JavaScript, you should stop using importScript and importStylesheet. [111]
Changes this week
- Developers are renaming 1.5 million accounts. After that all accounts will be unique and will work on all wikis. [112] [113] [114]
- If your wiki has the auto-fill tool for citations, you can now use it when you edit a reference. [115]
- You can now give examples for template options in TemplateData. [116]
Future changes
15:30, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 22 April 2015
- In the media: UK political editing; hoaxes; net neutrality
- Featured content: Vanguard on guard
- Traffic report: A harvest of couch potatoes
- Gallery: The bitter end
15:11, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Support request with team editing experiment project
Dear tech ambassadors, instead of spamming the Village Pump of each Wikipedia about my tiny project proposal for researching team editing (see here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Research_team_editing), I have decided to leave to your own discretion if the matter is relevant enough to inform a wider audience already. I would appreciate if you could appraise if the Wikipedia community you are more familiar with could have interest in testing group editing "on their own grounds" and with their own guidance. In a nutshell: it consists in editing pages as a group instead of as an individual. This social experiment might involve redefining some aspects of the workflow we are all used to, with the hope of creating a more friendly and collaborative environment since editing under a group umbrella creates less social exposure than traditional "individual editing". I send you this message also as a proof that the Inspire Campaign is already gearing up. As said I would appreciate of *you* just a comment on the talk page/endorsement of my project noting your general perception about the idea. Nothing else. Your contribution helps to shape the future! (which I hope it will be very bright, with colors, and Wikipedia everywhere) Regards from User:Micru on meta.
The Signpost: 29 April 2015
- Featured content: Another day, another dollar
- Traffic report: Bruce, Nessie, and genocide
- Recent research: Military history, cricket, and Australia targeted in Wikipedia articles' popularity vs. quality; how copyright damages economy
- Technology report: VisualEditor and MediaWiki updates
Your common.css page
Hi; I notice that in User:Unician/common.css you have the CSS rule
.ambox-Orphan {
display: inherit !important;
}
- please note that there is an error in this (almost certainly copied from an old version of Template:Orphan#Visibility) which causes incorrect display in some browsers.
To check this, visit this page and look at the second bullet (the one that precedes the text "This article is an orphan ..."). If this bullet is not in the same alignment as the other four, but displaced to the left, you can fix it by altering inherit
to table
in the CSS rule mentioned earlier. If that doesn't work either, alter it to block
.
Template:Orphan#Visibility has been amended. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:39, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Recent changes
- You can now chat with other users in Phabricator. [122]
15:16, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 06 May 2015
- News and notes: "Inspire" grant-making campaign concludes, grantees announced
- Featured content: The amorous android and the horsebreeder; WikiCup round two concludes
- Special report: FDC candidates respond to key issues
- Traffic report: The grim ship reality
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- You can now make charts and maps on your wiki with the new "graph" tool. If you have an old browser, you will see images instead. It uses a tool called Vega; you can learn how to use it and write help pages for your wiki. You can use the Vega edit tool to make charts and copy the code to your wiki. Charts and maps use complex code and you should put them into templates. In the future, you will be able to create charts with VisualEditor. [123] [124] [125]
- You can apply for technical jobs to develop tools for the community. [126]
- The logos of all wikis are now in a new place. It will make pages load faster. You can still ask to change the logo. You can also use local CSS for brief changes. [127] [128]
Changes this week
15:51, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 13 May 2015
- Foundation elections: Board candidates share their views with the Signpost
- Traffic report: Round Two
- In the media: Grant Shapps story continues
- Featured content: Four first-time featured article writers lead the way
Recent changes
- You can watch a video about the new graph tool.
Changes this week
- You can no longer create an account with a colon ':' in it. If you already have one, it still works. [132]
15:28, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 20 May 2015
- From the editor: Your voice is needed: strategic voting in the WMF election
- Traffic report: Inner Core
- News and notes: A dark side of comedy: the Wikipedia volunteers cleaning up behind John Oliver's fowl jokes
- Featured content: Puppets, fungi, and waterfalls
- In the media: Jimmy Wales accepts Dan David Prize
- WikiProject report: Cell-ebrating Molecular Biology
- Arbitration report: Editor conduct the subject of multiple cases
The Signpost: 27 May 2015
- News and notes: WMF releases quarterly reports, annual plans
- Discussion report: A relic from the past that needs to be updated
- Featured content: When music was confined to a ribbon of rust
- Recent research: Drug articles accurate and largely complete; women "slightly overrepresented"; talking like an admin
- Traffic report: Summer, summer, summertime
- Technology report: MediaWiki blows up printers
The Signpost: 03 June 2015
- News and notes: Three new community-elected trustees announced, incumbents out
- Discussion report: The deprecation of Persondata; RfA – A broken process; Complaints from users on Swedish Wikipedia
- Featured content: It's not over till the fat man sings
- Technology report: Things are getting SPDYier
- Special report: Towards "Health Information for All": Medical content on Wikipedia received 6.5 billion page views in 2013
- Traffic report: A rather ordinary week
Changes this week
- The title of dialogs is now easier to see when it is near long buttons. [133]
17:03, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 10 June 2015
- News and notes: Chapter financial trends analyzed, news in brief
- Traffic report: Two households, both alike in dignity
- Featured content: Just the bear facts, ma'am
- Technology report: Wikimedia sites are going HTTPS only
Recent changes
- Editing a page is now faster. This is because some statistics about edit filters were removed. [134]
Future changes
- Developers are working on a new tool to get and send newsletters. If you read or write a newsletter, share your ideas about it. [135]
15:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 17 June 2015
- Arbitration report: An election has consequences
- News and notes: Labs outage kills tools, self; news in brief
- Featured content: Great Dane hits 150
- Discussion report: A quick way of becoming an admin
- WikiProject report: Western Australia speaks – we are back
15:24, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 24 June 2015
- From the editor: The Signpost tagging initiative
- Featured content: One eye when begun, two when it's done
- Technology report: 2015 MediaWiki architecture focus and Multimedia roadmap announced
- News and notes: Board of Trustees propose bylaw amendments
- Arbitration report: Politics by other means: The American politics 2 arbitration
Recent changes
- Long lines in code blocks now look better. [139]
- You can look at a new site to learn how to reuse data from Wikimedia sites. [140]
Changes this week
- If you are an admin or have other special rights, you now need a strong password. [141]
- Bot and JavaScript coders: The old continuation mode of the API for
action=query
doesn't work any more. [142]
Future
- When you create a new account, it will also create one on Meta-Wiki and mediawiki.org. [143]
15:56, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 01 July 2015
- News and notes: Training the Trainers; VP of Engineering leaves WMF
- In the media: EU freedom of panorama; Nehru outrage; BBC apology
- WikiProject report: Able to make a stand
- Featured content: Viva V.E.R.D.I.
- Traffic report: We're Baaaaack
- Technology report: Technical updates and improvements
15:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 08 July 2015
- News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation annual plan released, news in brief
- In the media: Wikimania warning; Wikipedia "mystery" easily solved
- Traffic report: The Empire lobs back
- Featured content: Pyrénées, Playmates, parliament and a prison...
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
The Signpost: 15 July 2015
- Op-ed: On paid editing and advocacy: when the Bright Line fails to shine, and what we can do about it
- Traffic report: Belles of the ball
- WikiProject report: What happens when a country is no longer a country?
- News and notes: The Wikimedia Conference and Wikimania
- Featured content: When angels and daemons interrupt the vicious and intemperate
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
The Signpost: 22 July 2015
- From the editor: Change the world
- News and notes: Wikimanía 2016; Lightbreather ArbCom case
- Wikimanía report: Wikimanía 2015 report, part 1, the plenaries
- Traffic report: The Nerds, They Are A-Changin'
- WikiProject report: Some more politics
- Featured content: The sleep of reason produces monsters
- Gallery: "One small step..."
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Recent changes
- You can now use redirects to link to JavaScript pages. [147]
- You cannot use the compact user bar any more. [148]
- You can change your options to see bigger images. [149]
- You can now edit pages linked in "what links here" more easily. [150]
15:05, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 29 July 2015
- News and notes: BARC de-adminship proposal; Wikimania recordings debate
- Recent research: Wikipedia and collective intelligence; how Wikipedia is tweeted
- In the media: Is Wikipedia a battleground in the culture wars?
- Featured content: Even mammoths get the Blues
- Traffic report: Namaste again, Reddit
15:51, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 05 August 2015
- Op-ed: Je ne suis pas Google
- News and notes: VisualEditor, endowment, science, and news in brief
- WikiProject report: Meet the boilerplate makers
- Traffic report: Mrityorma amritam gamaya...
- Featured content: Maya, Michigan, Medici, Médée, and Moul n'ga
Recent changes
- MediaWiki can now hide the signature button when you edit a content page. [154]
- The "Your preferences have been saved" message has changed. You can now see more easily what was saved when you change preferences several times. [155]
- You can now play Ogg video files in some browsers that don't support this format. This solution uses JavaScript and works on desktop browsers only for now. It will work on mobile later. [156]
- It is now easier to see if there is a JavaScript error in a user or site script. [157]
- JavaScript authors:
- You can no longer use the Sajax library. You can see a list of pages to fix. [158] [159]
- You can no longer use
document.write
on Wikimedia wikis. You can see a list of pages to fix. [160] [161]
Future changes
- Some things in the watchlist will get a new look. [162]
14:58, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 12 August 2015
- News and notes: Superprotect, one year later; a contentious RfA
- In the media: Paid editing; traffic drop; Nicki Minaj
- Wikimanía report: Wikimanía 2015, part 2, a community event
- Traffic report: Fighting from top to bottom
- Featured content: Fused lizards, giant mice, and Scottish demons
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
- Blog: The Hunt for Tirpitz
Recent changes
- Many Wikipedias can now use information from any Wikidata item in any Wikipedia article. Before they could only use the Wikidata item that matched the subject of the article. [163] [164] [165]
Changes this week
- You can soon watch when something is added to or removed from a category. [166]
16:17, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 19 August 2015
- Travelogue: Seeing is believing
- Traffic report: Straight Outta Connecticut
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
The Signpost: 26 August 2015
- In focus: An increase in active Wikipedia editors
- In the media: Russia temporarily blocks Wikipedia
- News and notes: Re-imagining grants
- Featured content: Out to stud, please call later
- Arbitration report: Reinforcing Arbitration
- Recent research: OpenSym 2015 report
Future changes
- The Wikidata API will be updated with breaking changes. This will probably happen on September 9. [167]
21:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 02 September 2015
- Special report: Massive paid editing network unearthed on the English Wikipedia
- News and notes: Flow placed on ice
- Discussion report: WMF's sudden reversal on Wiki Loves Monuments
- Featured content: Brawny
- In the media: Orangemoody sockpuppet case sparks widespread coverage
- Traffic report: You didn't miss much
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Recent changes
- You can now mention up to 50 users in a post and they will get a notification. Previously you could notify up to 20 users. [168]
- A new version of the Wikidata Toolkit has been released. It now has Wikibase API support. [169]
- You can now use Wikidata to find all good or featured articles in a Wikipedia version. [170]
Changes this week
- The maximum character length when you search for something on the Wikimedia wikis is now 300 characters. [171]
- The notifications list has been split into two lists. As a first step, notifications about messages on your user talk page will be placed in the second list. Feedback is requested at the Echo talk page. [172][173]
Future changes
17:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 09 September 2015
- Gallery: Being Welsh
- Featured content: Killed by flying debris
- News and notes: The Swedish Wikipedia's controversial two-millionth article
- Traffic report: Mass media production traffic
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Recent changes
- You can now use the Wikidata query service. [176]
16:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 September 2015
- Editorial: No access is no answer to closed access
- News and notes: Byrd and notifications leave, but page views stay; was a terror suspect editing Wikipedia?
- In the media: Is there life on Mars?
- Featured content: Why did the emu cross the road?
- Traffic report: Another week
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Recent changes
- There is now an experimental Wikimedia maps service. You can give feedback here. [177][178]
- More Wikipedias can now use information from any Wikidata item in any Wikipedia article. Previously they could only use the Wikidata item that matched the subject of the article. [179]
Changes this week
18:29, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 23 September 2015
- In the media: PETA makes "monkey selfie" a three-way copyright battle; Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- Featured content: Inside Duke Humfrey's Library
- WikiProject report: Dancing to the beat of a... wikiproject?
- Traffic report: ¡Viva la Revolución! Kinda.
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Recent changes
- When you send an e-mail to another editor using Special:EmailUser, that user will now get a notification on the wiki as well. [182]
- You can now see 500 images when you upload images from Flickr with UploadWizard. Before this change the limit was 50. [183]
- The Wikimedia mailing lists have been upgraded. [184]
Changes this week
- There will be a new beta feature that allows editors to use Flow on their user talkpage if they want to. Each wiki can decide if they want to enable it. [185]
Future changes
- The Wikimedia Foundation developers want the community to decide who can use OAuth in the future. You can discuss it on Meta.
15:15, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 30 September 2015
- Recent research: Wiktionary special; newbies, conflict and tolerance; Is Wikipedia's search function inferior?
- Tech news: Tech news in brief
Recent changes
- The description at Special:ChangeEmail now clearly explains that the page can also be used to remove your email. [186]
Future changes
- Wikidata requests your input on how to improve the editing of Wikidata's data in other locations, such as Wikipedias.
18:32, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 07 October 2015
- Op-ed: Walled gardens of corruption
- Traffic report: Reality is for losers
- Featured content: This Week's Featured Content
- Arbitration report: Warning: Contains GMOs
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Recent changes
- The database size lists have been updated. These control special page update frequency and which wikis use global abuse filters. [187]
16:29, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 14 October 2015
- WikiConference report: US gathering sees speeches from Andrew Lih, AfroCrowd, and the Archivist of the United States
- News and notes: 2015–2016 Q1 fundraising update sparks mailing list debate
- Traffic report: Screens, Sport, Reddit, and Death
- Featured content: A fistful of dollars
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Recent changes
- Tech News is trying to make reading the newsletter easier. The
icon means the item is in the newsletter every week, but with new dates. The
icon means the item is mainly relevant for readers with technical knowledge. You can leave feedback on this change.
- Timestamps in the protection log will now be in the user's timezone. Previously they would show Coordinated Universal Time (UTC). [188]
Changes this week
16:02, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 21 October 2015
- Editorial: Women and Wikipedia: the world is watching
- In the media: "Wikipedia's hostility to women"
- Special report: One year of GamerGate, or how I learned to stop worrying and love bare rule-level consensus
- Featured content: A more balanced week
- Arbitration report: Four ArbCom cases ongoing
- Traffic report: Hiding under the covers of the Internet
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Changes this week
- You will be able to upload images to Wikimedia Commons from inside the wikitext editor by clicking "Upload" in the "Insert file" dialog.
Index and Page namespaces on Wikisource will be defined as content namespaces in
$wgContentNamespaces
. [193]
18:04, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 October 2015
- From the editor: The Signpost's reorganization plan—we need your help
- News and notes: English Wikipedia reaches five million articles
- In the media: The world's Wikipedia gaps; Google and Wikipedia accused of tying Ben Carson to NAMBLA
- Arbitration report: A second attempt at Arbitration enforcement
- Traffic report: Canada, the most popular nation on Earth
- Recent research: Student attitudes towards Wikipedia; Jesus, Napoleon and Obama top "Wikipedia social network"; featured article editing patterns in 12 languages
- Featured content: Birds, turtles, and other things
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
- Community letter: Five million articles
Recent changes
- You can now see how many editors are using a gadget on a wiki on Special:GadgetUsage. [194]
16:43, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 04 November 2015
- News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation finances; Superprotect is gone
- In the media: Ahmadiyya Jabrayilov: propaganda myth or history?
- Traffic report: Death, the Dead, and Spectres are abroad
- Featured content: Christianity, music, and cricket
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Recent changes
- Superprotect has been removed. [195]
- JSON dumps of the production search indexes are now available. They can be imported to Elasticsearch. [196]
Changes this week
Future changes
- A new tool to navigate through diff pages is being developed. You can test it out and give feedback. [198]
- The options on Special:Watchlist will look slightly different. [199]
17:18, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 11 November 2015
- Arbitration report: Elections, redirections, and a resignation from the Committee
- Discussion report: Compromise of two administrator accounts prompts security review
- Featured content: Texas, film, and cycling
- In the media: Sanger on Wikipedia; Silver on Vox; lawyers on monkeys
- Traffic report: Doodles of popularity
- Gallery: Paris
Changes this week
- You can use TemplateData to indicate how you want a template to be displayed in wikitext. [200]
- Echo notification icons in MonoBook will look more like other icons in the theme. [201]
- The Community Tech team is doing a community wishlist survey to understand what they should be working on. They are now accepting proposals in all languages. You can create your proposal in the small box above the blue button and click it when you're done.
- Wikis can make the welcome notification link to a specific page. [202]
Future changes
- Internet Explorer 8 will no longer have JavaScript support. You will still be able to browse and edit Wikipedia, but will not be able to use some features. This can be solved by upgrading to a newer version or switching to a different browser. The change will happen in January 2016. [203][204]
19:39, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 18 November 2015
- Special report: ArbCom election—candidates’ opinions analysed
- In the media: Icelandic milestone; apolitical editing
- Discussion report: BASC disbanded; other developments in the discussion world
- Arbitration report: Ban Appeals Subcommittee goes up in smoke; 21 candidates running
- Featured content: Fantasia on a Theme by Jimbo Wales
- Traffic report: Darkness and light
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
A new Pageview API has been announced. Feedback is requested to help decide which data to add to it next.
Changes this week
- There are no MediaWiki deployments this week (calendar).
Meetings
- You can join the next meeting with the Language Engineering team. The topic is: Content Translation updates and Questions & Answers. The meeting will be on 25 November at 13:00 (UTC). See how to join.
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 24 November at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
You can join the next meeting with the Architecture committee. The topic this week is "RfC: Raise MediaWiki's PHP version requirement and update coding standards". The meeting will be on 25 November at 21:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
From 1 December, the MediaWiki API will no longer support the dbg, txt, and yaml output formats. [205]
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
20:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 25 November 2015
- News and notes: Fundraising update; FDC recommendations
- Featured content: Caves and stuff
- Traffic report: J'en ai ras le bol
- Arbitration report: Third Palestine-Israel case closes; Voting begins
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
The symbol for advanced news items has been changed. This is because the symbols were too similar. If a news item is for more technical readers it now looks like this: . You can give feedback on this change.
Problems
- On September 29 users' skin preferences were removed by mistake on small and medium-sized wikis. This changed preferences back to Vector. Restoring all data would cause even more problems. Affected users who want to have their preference changed back globally can ask for it as a comment on Phabricator task T119206 until December 21 2015. [206]
- Some scheduled tasks were not working properly from September to recently. This meant some pages in the special pages namespace were not updated. It has now been fixed. [207]
Changes this week
- Wikinews, Wikispecies, MediaWiki.org and Meta will be able to use information from Wikidata. [208][209]
- There are no MediaWiki deployments this week (calendar).
Meetings
-
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 1 December at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
You can join the next meeting with the Architecture committee. The topic this week is using the
<figure>
tag for media. The meeting will be on 2 December at 22:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
- Category watchlists are now available on test wikis and MediaWiki.org. The plan is to enable it on most wikis in January. [210]
- Cross-wiki notifications are being developed. When this is done you will not have to go to the wiki where something happened to be notified. [211]
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
16:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 02 December 2015
- Op-ed: Whither Wikidata?
- Traffic report: Jonesing for episodes
- Featured content: This Week's Featured Content
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- Revision scoring will help to automatically identify bad-faith and good-faith edits. The point is to make it easier to block vandals and welcome newcomers. It currently supports Wikidata and 14 Wikipedias. [212]
Problems
- Meta was not given access to information from Wikidata last week. This will happen later. [213]
Changes this week
- You will be able to use wikilinks in Flow topic titles. [214]
- IP users will have a toolbar with links to the user talk page and user contributions. Some Wikipedias already have this feature. [215]
- You will be able to edit the graph size in the visual editor. You can either specify the size in the graph dialog or drag it to be the size you want it to be. [216]
- It will be easier to write math in the visual editor if you don't know LaTeX. You can use symbol buttons instead. [217]
- You will be able to use syntax highlighting when you write math with LaTeX in the visual editor. [218]
- UploadWizard will look a bit different. [219]
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 8 December. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 9 December. It will be on all Wikipedias from 10 December. (calendar).
- New MediaWiki versions will now be on Catalan and Hebrew Wikipedia on Wednesdays. Other Wikipedias get the new MediaWiki version on Thursdays. [220]
Meetings
-
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 8 December at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
You can join the next meeting with the Architecture committee. The topics this week are "Graph/Graphoid/Kartographer – data storage architecture" and "Parametric JSON builder". The meeting will be on 9 December at 22:00 (UTC). See how to join.
Future changes
- A new beta feature will show users links to related articles at the bottom of an article. It will not be enabled by default. [221]
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
17:52, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 09 December 2015
- News and notes: ArbCom election results announced
- Gallery: Wiki Loves Monuments 2015 winners
- Traffic report: So do you laugh, or does it cry?
- Featured content: Sports, ships, arts... and some other things
- Technology report: Tech news in brief
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Changes this week
- Meta will be able to use information from Wikidata. [222]
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 15 December. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 16 December. It will be on all Wikipedias from 17 December. (calendar).
Meetings
-
You can join the next meeting with the VisualEditor team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 15 December at 19:00 (UTC). See how to join.
You can join the next meeting with the Architecture committee. The topic this week is talking about the agenda for the Wikimedia Developer Summit. The meeting will be on 16 December at 22:00 (UTC). See how to join. [223]
Future changes
A new gadget manager will come next year. The new gadget system is called Gadgets 2.0. [224]
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
17:42, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
planet is back
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AWolf_1061&type=revision&diff=695607792&oldid=624138785
74.216.14.113 (talk) 06:47, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 December 2015
- In the media: Wales in China; #Edit2015
- Arbitration report: GMO case decided
- Featured content: An unusually slow week
- WikiProject report: Women in Red—using teamwork and partnerships to elevate online and offline collaborations
- Traffic report: A feast of Spam
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Tech News
- Because of the holidays, the next issue of Tech News will be sent out on 11 January 2016.
- The writers of the technical newsletter are asking for your opinion. Did you get the information you wanted this year? Did we miss important technical news in 2015? What kind of information was too late? Please tell us! You can write in your language. Thank you!
Recent changes
- CompletionSuggester is a new suggestions algorithm for Search. It is available as a Beta feature since 17 December. (more information)
- The Multimedia team is running an A/B test for the cross-wiki upload tool. They are testing four different interfaces. The test is running from 16-23 December. (more information)
Changes this week
- There is no deployment of MediaWiki scheduled until 12 January 2016 (calendar).
Meetings
- Should administrators and other users with advanced tools need stronger passwords? You can discuss about it in a Request for Comments.
- No meeting with the VisualEditor team on 22 and 29 December, and 5 January.
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
18:29, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
The Signpost: 30 December 2015
- News and notes: WMF Board dismisses community-elected trustee
- Arbitration report: Second Arbitration Enforcement case concludes as another case is suspended
- Featured content: The post-Christmas edition
- Traffic report: The Force we expected
- Year in review: The top ten Wikipedia stories of 2015
- In the media: Wikipedia plagued by a "Basket of Deception"
- Gallery: It's that time of year again