Jump to content

User talk:Abelmoschus Esculentus/Archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12

I'm afraid I have removed your rollback rights

I saw the discussion on User talk:Serial Number 54129 of your misuse of rollback and all the warnings you have received. Here, for instance, in early July, you admitted you had been using it wrong and blamed the tool (Huggle) and "The huge queue of edits" which supposedly forced you to work so fast. No, there is no forcing; your anti-vandalism work is appreciated, but you are not alone responsible for keeping Wikipedia vandalism-free. It's better to work correctly than fast. And here, on July 18, you acknowledge using rollback on the sandbox simply because you're bored, without even reading the edit you roll back — I did a double take when I saw that. With your attitude of 'yes, I made a mistake, so block me if you like' (!) — or indeed 'I'm bored' — and then you continue to misuse it, despite all the warnings — it seems to me that removing your rollback rights is the only way to actually slow you down, and I have done so. You'll have to do without them for a while. I have noted in your rights log that you can re-request rollback in a couple of months, provided you have shown that you understand and follow WP:BLANKING. You also need to show yourself altogether less "obsessed with reverting" — I'm quoting your own statement here. Bishonen | talk 17:15, 23 August 2018 (UTC).

It is impossible to love again anything you have truly ceased to love. Editors who return after retirement, or after a wearied or bitter departure, may edit again, but never with the same passion they once brought to the project. Each successive return will be with diminished dedication and shorter duration.
Despite the sandbox and the WP:BLANKING cases, many of the mistakes that I've made are simply because there is way too much problematic edits and too few people doing RCP. If there were more people checking, more time could be spent reviewing and fewer mistakes would be made. Once upon a time I see an edit which appears to be a hoax. After a few days, the edit is still not being reverted by someone. This reflected the fact that there are too few RCP and it's not being taken seriously. Yes you're right, I was not "forced" by the "huge queue of edits", but by the lack of RC patrollers. Now, you've told me that I am not alone responsible for keeping Wikipedia vandalism-free (which I think is correct to say so), so I respect your opinion, will let this "situation" go on and I will not bear the responsibility of not dealing with problematic edits anymore, even if I am granted rollback again after a few months.
It's understandable for you to make this decision. I'll try to slow down. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 02:32, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
@Oshwah and Jim1138: What do you think? ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:25, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
AE, I found this essay which could really help you see vandalism on RC patrolling in a new light: Wikipedia:Vandalism_does_not_matter. It helped me a little recently slow down and think while I did RC patrolling (as your advice to me recently also helped). So just something for you to think about in the future. Cheers JC7V-constructive zone 07:14, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
That is for blatant vandalism, not problematic edits. There’s a big difference I think? Blatant vandalism is very easy to deal with, but edits that violate Wikipedia policies such as WP:NPOV, WP:V and WP:OR are treated differently. ~ Abelmoschus Esculentus (alt) (talk to me) 08:44, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi Abelmoschus Esculentus. Personally, I'm not as concerned with the reverts made to the sandbox (since, after all, it is a sandbox and that's what the sandbox is for), but I completely understand the concerns raised by Bishonen regarding the mistakes made on Huggle. It's super easy to get yourself caught up in the "need to catch up and fix the vandalism" and I've allowed myself to sacrifice accuracy and care in exchange for speed many times (shoot, I'm sure Bishonen can attest to that... lol) - Huggle makes it very easy to do. The double-edged sword to having Huggle as such a powerful and fast tool is that it will apply reverts and warnings just as quickly as you're allowing yourself to patrol and press the buttons - that also means that any errors or mistakes with its use get applied just as fast. Mistakes like that on Huggle have a double-negative effect; they not only revert edits that aren't disruptive or vandalism (probably edits that are legitimate or at least made in good faith), but they also accuse the editor of adding vandalism when they are not doing so, leaving many to become angry and frustrated - not good. As Bishonen said above, the main thing for you to focus on during this time is accuracy; a buzzword for you to keep track of in your mind is, "no bad reverts". Just continue your work in recent changes patrolling; revert bad-faith edits, warn those users correctly, and report bad-faith editors to AIV after repeated abuse. Slow down, demonstrate perfect accuracy in your reverts, and ask questions if you're not sure about a situation. Give it a few months of that and you'll be fine ;-). An essay I wrote that you should read is this one - it talks about identifying test edits, but more importantly it talks about the principle of assuming good faith in situations of users adding edits that aren't improvements but maybe not to the level of blatant vandalism. If you have any questions, need any help, or if you just want to talk - you know where to find me ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:45, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) When I got rollback rights, I used Huggle for quite a while, but now I've completely stopped using it. I realized just how extremely easy it is to make mistakes without even realizing it, and it is much easier to navigate when you're directly on the wiki. So, I've just went back to patrolling recent changes with the "likely bad faith" and "likely have problems" filters, and using the normal rollback and Twinkle rollback buttons instead. Tbh, I'm amazed that experienced Hugglers who make 1000 edits a day with it, like Oshwah, don't make mistakes for half of their reverts. But everyone has their preferences and capabilities, I guess.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 21:52, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
SkyGazer 512 - I rearranged the UI on Huggle to display the important things that I need to see so that I don't make the common mistakes that others make (such as not noticing that a user made multiple edits on a page and you're only seeing one, and they make good edits when seen all-together, and then reverting all of them because of that). Don't get me wrong, I've made many mistakes on Huggle in the past and I'll still occasionally revert what I believed to be vandalism or something else only to find out that it wasn't. It's getting rarer and rarer, but it still doesn't feel good at all to many any mistakes - even just one. I've also used Huggle for many years and have 10+ years of experience reverting vandalism, which helps a lot. My point is that I'm not perfect and I'm definitely no exception :-P ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 23:29, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sandbox

Continuing off of Bishonen's concerns stated on your user talk page above, can I ask why you made these reverts on the Wikipedia Sandbox? (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13). I know that it's a sandbox and edits there don't really matter (for the most part), but it looks like you're patrolling the Sandbox like you are other pages? I also wasn't sure what your dummy edit here was trying to accomplish - I'm just curious and wanted to ask about that edit as well. Thanks - ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:07, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, AE, your recent contributions don't look much like you're getting less "obsessed with reverting". It might be better if you just left the sandbox alone. Oshwah, did you perhaps mean to paste another diff for this (your last diff above)? It doesn't look like a dummy edit. Bishonen | talk 23:29, 29 August 2018 (UTC).
Bishonen - Ahh, dang it. That's what happens when I go back-and-forth between Windows and MacOS - I end up using the wrong keyboard shortcuts to copy/paste something and I goof it up :-). I meant to link this diff; I've fixed the diff link above to be correct. Thanks for catching that ;-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:20, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Yes. I guess I should stop it. —AE (talk • contributions) 01:29, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2018

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:02, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

DRINK MORE WATER!!!

LolThegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 20:26, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Please create my userbox

AE Please create my user box. Hanan —Preceding undated comment added 11:30, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

@Hananmuzaffar123: What kind of userbox do you want? —AE (talk • contributions) 11:33, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
@Abelmoschus Esculentus: Simple but little bit fancy. ~Hanan~ (talk • contributions) 11:40, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Is User:Hananmuzaffar786 your previous account? —AE (talk • contributions) 11:42, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Trout

Whack!

You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Heh. This is, of course, for changing Template:Huggle/warn-1 such that all level 1 vandalism warnings issued by Huggle users linked to your user talk page, instead of their own—an error that was not identified for 47 days. Mz7 (talk) 06:35, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

It's too late! Haha —AE (talk • contributions) 06:41, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

"Not to be confused with..."

Hi Abelmoschus Esculentus. I noticed you're using {{distinguish}} on your user page, pointing links to a number of accounts that attempted to impersonate you. I don't think this template is necessary because all of the accounts have been blocked, so they won't be editing Wikipedia in the future. Additionally, a few of them also have notes on their user pages that explicitly state they were created to impersonate you. More importantly, by keeping links to the accounts on the top of your user page, you are giving recognition to the vandal, which may encourage them to do it again in the future. Mz7 (talk) 23:30, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Removed. Thank you Mz7 for your suggestion. That was for fun —AE (talk • contributions) 01:10, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Please note ...

Please note that it is advisable to wait at least 24 hours after close before one-click archiving a noticeboard thread. This is because Wikipedia editors live around the world, in various time zones, and also have varying sleep, work, and log-in cycles. Leaving threads at least 24 hours allows all participants and observers of the thread to read the outcome of the close. The easiest way to make sure you have waited at least 24 hours is to Google utc time and then subtract one day from that; avoid one-click archiving any thread closed after that time and date. Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 08:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2018

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

Administrator changes

added None
removed Asterion • Crisco 1492 • KF • Kudpung • Liz • Randykitty • Spartaz
renamed Optimist on the run → Voice of Clam

Interface administrator changes

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

Guideline and policy news

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

Technical news

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

Arbitration

  • The Arbitration Committee has resolved to perform a round of Checkuser and Oversight appointments. The usernames of all applicants will be shared with the Functionaries team, and they will be requested to assist in the vetting process. The deadline to submit an application is 23:59 UTC, 12 September, and the candidates that move forward will be published on-wiki for community comments on 18 September.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:22, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 36, 2018)

Jahangir (31 August 1569 – 28 October 1627) was the fourth Mughal Emperor, who ruled the Mughal Empire from 1605 until his death in 1627. Pictured is a 17th century painting of Jahangir hunting with a falcon.
Hello, Abelmoschus Esculentus.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

Jahangir

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Public good • Guacamole

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:05, 3 September 2018 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

You've got mail

Hello, Abelmoschus Esculentus. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. JC7V-constructive zone 05:33, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
@JC7V7DC5768: Replied. —AE (talk • contributions) 08:23, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

No subject

Hi I am a novice editor trying to create a page for my friend. you just replied to my query on submission of drafts. indeed it got rejected because of lack of enough external links. How can i overcome this problem and where should all the links be shown on the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhijitdyp (talk • contribs) 12:33, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

@Abhijitdyp: Hello. Lack of external links does not matter. Your articles, however, lack independent, secondary sources. (?) Here are reasons why we should provide reliable sources:
For information on referencing citations in Wikipedia articles, see Help:Footnotes, Wikipedia:Inline citation, and Help:Referencing for beginners.
—AE (talk • contributions) 12:44, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

List of South African exchange-traded funds

Good morning AE

Regards from Johannesburg

With ref to this attempted amendment :

They are not going to allow us to update the information (after I updated all!)

Possibly only the JSE or each issuer needs to update their own ETFs/ETNs?

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:Exchange_Traded_Funds_SA?markasread=143661761



The wiki List of South African exchange-traded funds need updating - we would like to update the list - we have no idea why the suggested edit was not allowed as we First timers to wikipedia.

We work in the industry but we are just interested in keeping the information correct. This is not marketing.

Can you please help us - Investor will be referring to the list and we would like to ensure they have the complete and correct information form a independent source ?

Did we do something technically

How do we ensure the content is verifiable ? Can we get a few industry player to confirm it - should we get the exchange to confirm it ?

Should we nominate some one in the industry to keep it updated ?

Thanks & Very best regards

Corne du Toit - corne.dutoit@me.com 102.177.134.83 (talk) 07:46, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).https://www.jse.co.za/trade/equity-market/exchange-traded-products/exchange-traded-funds

102.177.134.83 (talk) 07:46, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello. Sorry if my explanation is not clear - but please review WP:COI. Conflict of interest editing is strongly discouraged in Wikipedia and will usually result in your changes being reverted by another editor upon discovering that you have a conflict of interest. Please don't edit articles where you have these conflicts, as it makes edits to be article impossible to reflect a neutral point of view and will result in inadvertent and unpremeditated bias being added regardless of intent. However, you are welcome to propose changes on the article's talk page. Is User:Exchange Traded Funds SA your account? —AE (talk • contributions) 13:04, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Tech News: 2018-36

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

  • There is a new user right for users who can edit CSS and JavaScript for the entire wiki. Before this all admins could edit CSS and JavaScript. This was a security risk. This group is called interface administrators. Administrators can delete user CSS and JavaScript pages. [1][2]
  • There will be an A/B test on the Wikipedia mobile website. It starts this week. It tests how we show templates that show information about an article. The test will last two weeks. [3][4]
  • You can now use different CSS rules for different skins when you edit templates. This is because of TemplateStyles. [5]
  • wp10 in ORES is now called articlequality. [6]
  • When you get a new message on your talk page you get a yellow message in the toolbar. The preference to show or not show this has been removed. [7]

Problems

  • UploadWizard had problems with campaigns. Users could not upload files. This has now been fixed. [8]
  • You can get a notification when a link is made to a page you created. This has not worked since June. It was fixed last week. [9]

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 4 September. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 5 September. It will be on all wikis from 6 September (calendar).

Meetings

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

16:47, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #328

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Development
    • Final polishing on first version of Senses support for Lexemes. (phabricator:T201000, phabricator:T202729, phabricator:T198036, phabricator:T203334)
    • Continued work on merging Lexemes. Merging via the SpecialPage is done and will be rolled out soon. Merging via the API is still being worked on. (phabricator:T189129)
    • Long Lemmas in Lexemes look bad because they are not flowing to the next line and instead break the layout. Working on a fix. (phabricator:T195367)
    • Improving the validity of the HTML of the Lexeme headers. (phabricator:T196228)
    • Worked on showing the Lemma(s) or Representation(s) when Lexemes or Forms are mentioned in constraint reports. (phabricator:T195315)
    • Got a new beta feature ready for deployment that will improve the suggestions for properties like sex/gender by first suggesting the values defined in the one-of constraint. (phabricator:T202712)

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.



School of Communication of University of Navarra (Fcomunav)

Abelmoschus Esculentus, thank you so much for your message and indications. The article is already completed and ready for review in order to be published.--Hard (talk) 11:13, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
In posthumous recognition for your great vandal fighting and the number of rollback conflicts you have caused me. L293D (☎ • ✎) 13:35, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Talk page

Please find the discussion about The Username at ARV. Thanks!Thegooduser Let's Chat 🍁 01:38, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Mass revert

Gracias. That was very irresponsible--I'm too tired and barely keeping open my eyelids. Very sorry for the inconvenience. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:42, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

@Koavf: No problem. Glad that it didn't crash my computer Just be a little more careful next time... —AE (talk • contributions) 08:45, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Relists

Hi AE, I'm wondering if you could provide an explanation for your decision to relist several recent AfDs:

I would greatly appreciate if you could share your rationale for relisting these AfDs. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 02:57, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

@L235: Oh seems I haven't read WP:RELIST. Sorry. Undone edits for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manuel Ramírez (photography). For Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vishnu Puran (TV series), Kirbanzo relisted it the third time without rationale, is that also improper? —AE (talk • contributions) 03:06, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
It's all good – thanks for taking corrective action here. Wikipedia:Relist bias may also be a good read. I wasn't going to follow up with Kirbanzo but I'll ping them here so they can respond if they wish. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 03:19, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I usually only relist a discussion because otherwise it would be closed as no consensus - otherwise, I would provide reasoning. Just haven't had a reason to give rationale yet. Kirbanzo (talk) 20:32, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
That's not a policy-based reason to relist. If a discussion would otherwise be closed as no consensus and it's already been relisted twice, unless there is a compelling reason to think that a consensus will develop in the fourth week of discussion, the AfD should just be closed as no consensus. You do indeed have a reason to give rationale – the policy says you should give a rationale every time when relisting after two or more relists. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 21:42, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi

I really like what you wrote above at a discussion. "It is impossible to love again anything you have truly ceased to love. Editors who return after retirement, or after a wearied or bitter departure, may edit again, but never with the same passion they once brought to the project. Each successive return will be with diminished dedication and shorter duration." Knightrises10 (talk) 18:53, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

@Knightrises10: It’s from WP:OWB —AE (talk • contributions) 01:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Re

Hello,

Unfortunately, I can't really find any more sources other than those three. I don't know Dutch; I just poorly Google-translated an article of a recently deceased person from the Dutch Wikipedia. If it doesn't meet notability guidelines for English Wikipedia, then so be it. Also, I've not heard of this "draft" concept; is this something new? Thanks for informing me of the deletion, anyway.

Jerome501 (talk) 21:54, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Draft is not a new concept. It is closely related to the origin of AFC. —AE (talk • contributions) 10:51, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

References/Categories

Thank you for the heads up RE: Categories. Unfortunately I don’t seem to be able to add them on my smart phone with which I do my editing. All attempts seem to just add the categories to the references section. Is there something I am missing? Thanks again, G— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hildreth gazzard (talk • contribs) 12:21, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

You are missing your signature. —AE (talk • contributions) 12:22, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
You have always worked tirelessly to protect Wikipedia from vandalism. Great work, keep it up. Cheers, Knightrises10 (talk) 11:01, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Nah. I seldom work in that area now. —AE (talk • contributions) 12:26, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

But your overall contributions to this deserve some praise. Knightrises10 (talk) 12:49, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

This week's article for improvement (week 37, 2018)

The People's Republic of Angola covers the period of Angolan history as a self-declared socialist state established in 1975 to the time it was dismantled in 1992.
Hello, Abelmoschus Esculentus.

The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection:

People's Republic of Angola

Please be bold and help to improve this article!

Previous selections: Jahangir • Public good

Get involved with the TAFI project. You can: Nominate an article • Review nominations

Posted by: MusikBot talk 00:06, 10 September 2018 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject TAFI • Opt-out instructions

Please comment on Talk:Sugar

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Sugar. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Request for Adoption

Dear AE,

I was wondering if you would consider adopting me? Your User Page says that you are seeking users to adopt.

谢谢您， --DannyS712 (talk) 10:17, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

@DannyS712: Yes I’m willing to adopt anyone. I’ll add your name to my list of adoptees in Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area/Adopters. If you have any questions, want to consult me before making any decisions or just want to chat, you may post it here, I’ll reply as soon as possible. Any kind of questions are welcome. Happy editing :) —AE (talk • contributions) 10:49, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
By the way I prefer communicating in English here. Also, I don’t use simplified Chinese ;) —AE (talk • contributions) 10:50, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
@Abelmoschus Esculentus: Thank you so much! I'll stick to English from now on. I already have a question: now that I have been adopted, what should I do with the "Adopt Me" user-box on my page? Is there any way to have a userbox say that I have been adopted? Should I mention you? Thanks, -DannyS712 (talk) 10:54, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Check this out —AE (talk • contributions) 10:58, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
@Abelmoschus Esculentus: Thanks! DannyS712 (talk) 11:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Draft review

@Abelmoschus Esculentus: can you give me feedback on my draft Draft:Special Counsel Investigation - Legal Teams? --DannyS712 (talk) 21:31, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

@DannyS712: Hello. The topic and the content is ok, but please don't start it with something like "This is a ...". It is not professional at all and we never use phrases like this. Also, one-sentenced paragraphs aren't found in both good articles and featured articles. Perhaps the "Others" section should be merged to another section? —AE (talk • contributions) 09:26, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #329

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.


Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Abelmoschus_Esculentus/Archive_11&oldid=861114941"