Jump to content

User talk:GeneralNotability/Archives/2024/July

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

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by ClueBot III (talk | contribs) at 23:18, 15 August 2024 (Archiving 2 discussions from User talk:GeneralNotability. (BOT)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)


Wikidata weekly summary #634

Tech News: 2024-27

MediaWiki message delivery 23:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 July 2024

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

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

Administrator changes

added
removed

Technical news

Miscellaneous


Voting to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter is ending soon

Copied from Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) § Voting to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter is ending soon because this page is listed on Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Subscribe.
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Hello everyone,

This is a kind reminder that the voting period to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter will be closed on July 9, 2024, at 23:59 UTC.

If you have not voted yet, please vote on SecurePoll.

On behalf of the Charter Electoral Commission,

RamzyM (WMF) 03:45, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #635

Tech News: 2024-28

MediaWiki message delivery 21:29, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

U4C Special Election - Call for Candidates

Copied from Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) § U4C Special Election - Call for Candidates because this page is listed on Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Subscribe.
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Hello all,

A special election has been called to fill additional vacancies on the U4C. The call for candidates phase is open from now through July 19, 2024.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members are invited to submit their applications in the special election for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

In this special election, according to chapter 2 of the U4C charter, there are 9 seats available on the U4C: four community-at-large seats and five regional seats to ensure the U4C represents the diversity of the movement. No more than two members of the U4C can be elected from the same home wiki. Therefore, candidates must not have English Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, or Italian Wikipedia as their home wiki.

Read more and submit your application on Meta-wiki.

In cooperation with the U4C,

-- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 00:02, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Arb case of ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ

Hello, I believed this one, ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk · contribs) is WMF-banned user, Gustin Kelly (talk · contribs). Will you tag their userpage as sock? -Lemonaka 03:45, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 219, July 2024

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:08, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #536

Tech News: 2024-29

MediaWiki message delivery 01:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Old Sock puppet investigation

Hey, you may not remember but a long time ago I set up a sock puppet investigation for a user named Vamlos I was wondering if there was some way I could have it looked at again, also do you know of some way we could comb through all his edits to make sure he hasn't manipulated any information? Also the whole reason I got into this trouble with him is because of the state the Interracial marriage page was in, and is still in, how do I go about fixing any of this? All these unresolved issues were the reason I left wiki, I see you have recently left wiki too, this site is bittersweet, I wish you the best my friend, wherever you may be Toby Mitches (talk) 14:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikimedia Movement Charter ratification voting results

Copied from Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) § Wikimedia Movement Charter ratification voting results because this page is listed on Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Subscribe.
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Hello everyone,

After carefully tallying both individual and affiliate votes, the Charter Electoral Commission is pleased to announce the final results of the Wikimedia Movement Charter voting.  

As communicated by the Charter Electoral Commission, we reached the quorum for both Affiliate and individual votes by the time the vote closed on July 9, 23:59 UTC. We thank all 2,451 individuals and 129 Affiliate representatives who voted in the ratification process. Your votes and comments are invaluable for the future steps in Movement Strategy.

The final results of the Wikimedia Movement Charter ratification voting held between 25 June and 9 July 2024 are as follows:

Individual vote:

Out of 2,451 individuals who voted as of July 9 23:59 (UTC), 2,446 have been accepted as valid votes. Among these, 1,710 voted “yes”; 623 voted “no”; and 113 selected “–” (neutral). Because the neutral votes don’t count towards the total number of votes cast, 73.30% voted to approve the Charter (1710/2333), while 26.70% voted to reject the Charter (623/2333).

Affiliates vote:

Out of 129 Affiliates designated voters who voted as of July 9 23:59 (UTC), 129 votes are confirmed as valid votes. Among these, 93 voted “yes”; 18 voted “no”; and 18 selected “–” (neutral). Because the neutral votes don’t count towards the total number of votes cast, 83.78% voted to approve the Charter (93/111), while 16.22% voted to reject the Charter (18/111).

Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation:

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees voted not to ratify the proposed Charter during their special Board meeting on July 8, 2024. The Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, Nataliia Tymkiv, shared the result of the vote, the resolution, meeting minutes and proposed next steps.  

With this, the Wikimedia Movement Charter in its current revision is not ratified.

We thank you for your participation in this important moment in our movement’s governance.

The Charter Electoral Commission,

Abhinav619, Borschts, Iwuala Lucy, Tochiprecious, Der-Wir-Ing

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

IPBE permanent status

Hello. You granted me IPBE status last year in August for a period of one year and my rights are about to expire so I wanted to make you aware that I have emailed the checkuser team to appeal/apply for permanent status in case you had any input about my asking for it again this time on a permamnent basis this time. Thank you for granting me the right for this past year. It has been very helpful for me. Huggums537voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk) 15:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) @Huggums537: you should probably be aware that the checkusers mailing list does not accept emails from non-members, so your message may not have gone through. In future you can email the functionaries' mailing list, which checkusers are also members of, at functionaries-en@lists.wikimedia.org. I saw your request here and I've extended IPBE for you for one more year from the previous expiry. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:08, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
@Ivanvector, I don't believe the functionaries list accepts outside email either. The correct address for IPBE requests is checkuser-en-wp@wikipedia.org (see WP:IPECPROXY). – bradv 16:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
I was just about to say that I got the email address by following the instructions given in the How to request section at WP:IPECPROXY which @Bradv had beat me to already. If it isn't accepting emails instructions need to be updated or someone needs to check it to make sure emails are getting through... Huggums537voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk) 16:28, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Hmm, the private list is checkuser-l, not checkuser-en-wp. Maybe I've got it all mixed up. Whatever it is, I didn't see your email. I'll ask around and someone will update those instructions if need be. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
The request did go through to the correct channel, and I just closed the ticket. – bradv 17:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
@Bradv and @Ivanvector, I am also applying to get permanent GIPBE at: Steward requests/Global permissions and I am concerned that a mere one year extension here will affect that decision there since they waited to see if IPBE was established here before they would establish GIPBE there. Will you please reopen the ticket here and reconsider giving me the permanent IPBE I was requesting since there was a misunderstanding here where Ivanvector essentially granted a good faith extension without even seeing the actual request? Thank you very much. Huggums537voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk) 17:24, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
My understanding of the local policy is that we are only allowed to grant the permission for terms of at most one year, and then you should re-apply if you still need it. I see nothing wrong with granting it to you for a longer term or indefinitely, other than that I don't think I'm allowed. Anyway, global IPBE does not let you edit through local IP blocks, so you'll also need the local permission even if you're granted the global one. And checkuser-en-wp is the right address: that's the intake queue for the checkuser volunteer response team, which I'm not on for some reason.
I'm going to see what we can do for you here, but it might take a little while to figure out. You're good to go for now, at least. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
@Ivanvector, thank you for the immediate good faith extension here without having seen the "complete and official" request first, but only this cursory one here. Also, thanks for the strong vote of confidence for an indef status on my IPBE rights. It will be ok if it takes some time to figure out because I just realized they must have changed the rules over on Meta since I first established the rights. It appears they now require a minimum two week period before granting any requests, presumably for reasons related to deliberation/consensus. On a side note, I stumbled upon some interesting information that might be helpful to the case. When I was browsing the userpage of my former mentor @SMcCandlish, I found that @Jon Kolbert had given him GIPBE with no expiry so that got me to thinking to check this list for other examples of users that are not nor ever have been admins with no expiry set on IPBE and I didn't even get past the "A"'s when I found that @Materialscientist granted Ammarpad IPBE with no expiry since late 2017. Just to make sure this was not a one-off or some weird quirk, I went ahead and found one more example where @KrakatoaKatie also granted Antiqueight IPBE with no expiry since late 2017 as well. I hope I don't have to go through the whole list in alphabetical order all the way to the "Z"'s to find every single example here... Huggums537voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk) 09:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Huggums537, in 2017 IPBE and other user rights were on/off; you had it permanently or you didn't have it at all. Expiration dates for user rights didn't come until just a couple of years ago. If you want to go find all examples of IPBE without expiration, be my guest, but it won't endear you to the CUs and it won't help your case for a longer term. Please do not ping me again to this thread. Katietalk 04:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
My apologies to all the users pinged in this thread. I just realized I provided the examples above to prove a point without actually making any point. The point I was trying to make is that there appears to be evidence of a wide latitude for discretion of the setting of expiry as in the example just a couple years ago where @Deepfriedokra granted APK the customary one year right, then no expiry after that. Huggums537voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk) 07:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
There is also another very similar example to that one right here where the customary one year IPBE was granted and then no expiry after that. I'm not really all that worried about endearing myself to CU's. I just want what makes sense to me and however I can show proof it appears to be customary and fair. Thank you. Huggums537voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk) 08:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Comment: I don't usually give away a whole bunch of personal information, but if it will help the process to come to a decision more efficiently, I can share the fact that my primary profession is in the transportation industry and travelling for work IS what I mainly do for a living. The real estate investing, online selling, and other stuff are just side hustles. I think reasonable people can see I am a busy person on the road not living in my parents' basement so having no expiry set would relieve me from pointless periodic time wasting. (No offense to anyone living in the folks' basement. I'm all for saving money!) Huggums537voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk) 11:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

@Huggums537: I have a lot of experience of granting IPBE. Yes, we have a lot of discretion. Currently the longest I grant is I think about 3 years (maybe some a bit longer), which is generally for people who have had one or more year-long grants before, and have a network/block problem (i.e. a need) lasting that long. Our granting practices have changed over time, and vary by admin for other reasons, but there is a definite trend towards not granting risky rights indefinitely. This is because users do not last forever, and when they become inactive their accounts become a rich target for compromise attempts. Plus they confound attempts to maintain rights for others who may or may not need them. I think you'll find that checkusers are on average happy to grant IPBE in many cases, for as long as they are needed. They are not needed indefinitely, which in many cases is equivalent to forever, and so it's not really reasonable to insist on indefinite. Just ask for a longer period each time and you will soon have enough IPBE to not worry about it again. Come visit me in a year and I'll make sure the next grant is longer, if you still need it. Most meta stewards understand our rights-granting policies and it shouldn't affect what they grant you. -- zzuuzz (talk) 08:44, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
WOW. 3 years seems kinda strict compared to others who have set no expiry. I appreciate the offer, but I might wait for a better one to come along from a more freethinking admin since Katie already warned me my crazy idea of going through the whole list to find all the examples wouldn't help me so it seems my best option is to humbly wait patiently for someone to be kindly generous or freethinking since I have not made any effort to endear myself to anyone. I guess that is the rub. Maybe if I wasn't so cold and calculating, then you guys would trust me more and I could endear you to just give me what I want because you like me and trust me so much...😂 Huggums537voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk) 09:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Trust and like don't really come into it, though I will say that it's easy to squander good opportunities. Ivan granted IPBE apparently even without reading your full request, and I'm in the same position. No, the question is one of need. You need IPBE? You have it. You need it forever? Unlikely. -- zzuuzz (talk) 10:44, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Well, I will keep your opportunity in mind. It is appreciated. I just see things differently than most do I guess. IPBE has probably been around here longer than I have so it doesn't make any common sense to me that it suddenly became a security risk in just the past couple years. I think you probably described the situation very accurately when you said the idea of this has led to a recent practice where ...there is a definite trend towards not granting risky rights indefinitely. I'm of the belief that this is more grounded in the "trend" part of the description where a type of herd mentality led to others following the trend thinking it was some sort of brilliant idea when in fact it may have all been started just because one person wanted some way to put a restriction on some asshole. If it truly were such a great security risk, then we would have to ask ourselves about that question of need and why anyone outside of admins much less the 5 examples I gave would ever need it "forever". We would also have to ask ourselves why all of the people who currently have it "forever" and are not admins are not being restricted with time limited rights. Has there really been any serious discussion about this "risk" or is it truly just a recent trend in the community as you described? Huggums537voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk) 13:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
I think that it's time to drop this, before someone starts wondering why you would care so much about avoiding scrutiny a year from now. – bradv 17:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Oh. I've heard this music before and the overture to this melody tells me my eardrums will be blown out of proportion before the end of the crescendo so it was real nice chatting with you fine folks... Huggums537voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk) 20:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment: Ajraddatz, was kind enough to grant the GIPBE on Meta and there was even a hint about the possibility getting GIPBE on a permanent basis next time so that is some good news. However, there seems to have been an issue with the archive bot interrupting discussions over there and I opened a discussion about it at: Meta:Talk:Steward_requests/Global_permissions#Problems_with_bot_or_stewards?_Community_decides... if anybody is interested in reading/discussing it. Also, Ajraddatz if you would like an opportunity to answer my reply that got deleted in the archive here this would probably be just as appropriate a place as any since the commentary was about this very discussion I think. Thanks. Huggums537voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk) 23:51, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
    Your tone just seems very combative here, especially since you are arguing with a bunch of highly trusted volunteers who have been doing a lot of this for a long time. It's generally recommended to come into these requests with some humility and grace. (G)IPBE is a right with a very low bar for entry, but I for example would be hesitant to grant it to a user with a history of behaviour issues on-wiki. Repeated interactions like this one might give rise to that impression about you. I say this without any malice towards you, and was happy to grant your request assuming good faith. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 01:01, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
    Ok. I clearly see the point you are trying to make and that's completely fair, but with all due respect and all of the humility or grace that I can possibly muster, I would like to suggest that using very vague and highly subjective terminology such as "tone" to determine the intent of behavior in text based messaging is extremely unreliable at worst and at best it causes enough confusion in the discussion for me to ask myself if I'm just that incredibly dense or do these over broad generalizations have so little substance that they just squish through your fingers when you try to grasp them? The two obvious solutions that stick out to me are first that you could just ask me about my tone instead of trying to guess at it and I would be very happy to relieve everyone here by letting them know I've had no harmful intent of being combative or argumentative so that way you have it straight from the primary horse's mouth that no matter what the "tone" looks like this is the meaning behind it. The other solution is to explain the points better, and if there are any secondary source experts who think they know me better than I know myself, then be my guest to get them to analyze the source material and help explain it to me what an asshole I've been because I still don't get it. Huggums537voted! (sign🖋️|📞talk) 08:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 July 2024

Wikidata weekly summary #637

Tech News: 2024-30

MediaWiki message delivery 00:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)

Vote now to fill vacancies of the first U4C

Copied from Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous) § Vote now to fill vacancies of the first U4C because this page is listed on Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Subscribe.
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear all,

I am writing to you to let you know the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open now through August 10, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

In cooperation with the U4C,

RamzyM (WMF) 02:46, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #638

Tech News: 2024-31

MediaWiki message delivery 23:08, 29 July 2024 (UTC)