User talk:Amiodarone

New deal for page patrollers

Hi Amiodarone,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:20, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Four years now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:27, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you! —Amiodarone ^talk 09:41, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

March 2019

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

GAB^gab 19:01, 8 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to WP:STiki!

Hello, Amiodarone, and welcome to STiki! Thank you for your recent contributions using our tool. We at STiki hope you like using the tool and decide to continue using it in the future. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Information about STiki, including:
- Using STiki and its hotkeys
- Comparison with other tools
Information about vandalism on Wikipedia

Here are some pages which are a little more fun:

The STiki leaderboard - See how you are faring against other STiki users!
Userboxes - Do not hesitate to wear the STiki label with pride by choosing from a selection of userboxes!

We hope you enjoy maintaining Wikipedia with STiki! If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions don't hesitate to drop a note over at the STiki talk page and we'll be more than happy to help. Again, welcome, and thanks! West.andrew.g (talk) 10:26, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Having a username change after you start using STiki will reset your classification count. Please let us know about such changes on the talk page page to avoid confusion in issuing milestone awards. You can also request for your previous STiki contributions to be reassigned to your new account name.

AWB

Hello Amiodarone. This is a follow-up to your request for AWB approval. Can you give an example of a task you would do if you had AWB access? EdJohnston (talk) 14:55, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @EdJohnston:. Thanks for following up with me. I really want to try RegEx with the dumps WP:TYPO has, and I noticed there's similar functions with AWB and WPCleaner. I've made quite a few edits recently with WPCleaner and I like the way I can focus on one area that needs help for many articles (or a lot of help for one). It forces me look at way more articles than I would normally, and makes me learn things I didn't know about. And when I have a list of articles that need attention I can contribute more than if I just sit around on Huggle etc. reverting vandalism. I feel like since I'm not that good at writing articles, the best way I can contribute is in other ways such as this. I'd like to think maybe I help an article or two get to a higher class. —Amiodarone ^talk 15:18, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't WP:TYPO generate lists for people to work on? You could go ahead and work manually from one of those lists. EdJohnston (talk) 15:34, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: to finish my 250 edits you mean? I'm nearly halfway there —Amiodarone ^talk 16:59, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The actual generation of the lists takes quite a bit of experience, so it would be better if you spend some time first trying to fix some of the problems. EdJohnston (talk) 20:30, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: OK then. Can do. Ty for patience. —Amiodarone ^talk 21:27, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: Do you know User:Beland? I was thinking about asking him if there was anything I could do to help out with the list generation of WP:Typo_Team/moss. I'm not sure if there is but I figured "maybe" —Amiodarone ^talk 16:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: Non-automated edits: 336 btw :D —Amiodarone ^talk 06:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! Currently the biggest problem with the actual generation of moss dumps is separating English typos from non-English words. When I have some time, I plan to enhance transliterate.py with some third-party libraries or some substitution maps to cover some specific transliteration schemes that editors and sources are probably using for some popular languages. But if you enjoy coding in Python, pull requests are welcome.

I think we have much bigger problems with the fixing of detected problems, and I was actually hoping AWB users could help out with some relatively straightforward issues that happen hundreds of thousands of articles. The biggest problem (affecting over 700,000 articles) for me is the use of curly and other quotation marks that don't comply with MOS:STRAIGHT. In many cases these are confusing moss, and either preventing it from spell-checking the article entirely (because they are mismatched with straight quotes) or causing direct quotations that should not be spell-checked to generate false positives. Since there are so many quote marks to fix, I thought it might be a good idea to start smaller with AWB and see if it could be helpful in fixing some lower-frequency problems. I've posted a draft set of new rules at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Typos#HTML entities. These have the benefit of (I think) being always safe to apply, whereas changing quotation marks may require some editorial judgement sometimes, I think mostly on pages that discuss the non-straight quote marks as a topic of the article. If an enthusiastic AWB user wants to test those out and get them integrated into the live rules for everyone, that would definitely get the ball rolling on this massive cleanup.

Regardless, thanks for your help fixing typos so far! With the help of many editors such as yourself, we seem to be making excellent progress toward spell-checking the whole project at least once. -- Beland (talk) 22:53, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Beland: Ooooh are those the "apostrophes" that WPCleaner keeps wanting me to fix that occur in most every contraction? I stopped correcting them because I wasn't sure what change it was making; looked the same. I'd be glad to look into your AWB stuff, when I get access —Amiodarone ^talk 23:31, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I assume so; the most common transformations that need to happen are:

’ -> '

” -> "

“ -> "

‘ -> '

» -> "

« -> "

With single quotes, we have to be more careful because there are some special characters that are used in languages like Hawaiian and Arabic. You can read more at Apostrophe#Unicode etc. and Quotation_mark#Electronic_documents. » and « should usually be converted like this per MOS:CONFORM, but there may be some pages where the actual usage of them is being discussed, and I also see them in web page titles used as separators (in which case I usually convert them to a single ASCII dash, in the spirit of MOS:CONFORM and to avoid parsing problems). MOS:PUNCT is a bit more comprehensive than my explanation, but that's the gist. -- Beland (talk) 00:09, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Approved for WP:AWB

Hello Amiodarone. After our further conversation, I've approved your request for WP:AWB access and you should be OK to get started now. When reviewing your non-automated contributions, I happened to notice a couple of things:

Reference number fix -- The fix is to a naked reference number ('5') that leads to uglybridges.com. This might be added to a reference list in a better way.
Adding http: to a URL -- You added http:// in front of www.febt.org. Whenever you do this kind of fix, it might be worth checking if the web site would also open with https:. In any case where it does work, it is better to have https.

Your work was correct in both cases, but you might just keep an eye open for other problems in the article, while you are there. Good luck with AWB, and let me know if you have any questions! Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 20:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ed! and I appreciate the feedback. —Amiodarone ^talk 21:33, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chaim Rumkowski

I encourage you to resolve the current dispute on the following page Talk:Chaim_Rumkowski#Current_dispute

Cautious (talk) 20:28, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Precious anniversary 5

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your access to AWB may be temporarily removed

Hello Amiodarone! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II ^talk 17:02, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]