Jump to content

User talk:Ancheta Wis/Archive 14

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14

Administrators' newsletter – January 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

Administrator changes

added Clovermoss
readded Dennis Brown
removed

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Recent Blocks

Hi Ancheta Wis. I couldn't help but notice that you blocked User:147.236.228.132, User talk:2607:FEA8:4B67:4E00:8C97:A0F9:35FF:31F1 (after they undid an edit of yours?), User:152.32.99.27, and User:Bon Joe vie all without warning, citing NOTHERE. I then saw that you blocked User:Kent Dominic with a reason of "cooling off time". I'm curious if you can you tell me the answers the following to the questions:

  1. When is it ever appropriate to block an editor without warning?
  2. What is the difference between NOTHERE and vandalism?
  3. When it is ever appropriate to make a "cool down" block? -Fastily 06:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Good questions: NOTHERE means making edits for other-than-improving an article. However, a hasty skip-through (in the sense of a drive-by edit) need not be vandalism. --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 06:51, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Interesting. Can you elaborate? And are you going to answer Q1 and Q3? -Fastily 06:54, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Example for Q1: the IP knows programming, but the name they attempted to add does not show up in the Haskell talk sites.
Q3:Some users use speedy operations (such as in the deletion discussions) and then reverse course when they learn from my replies. (Loose cannons) --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 07:07, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Regarding the edits to Mathematics: My citation is H.S. Wall Creative Mathematics "A proof consists of a succession of statements, each of which leads to the next". The substitution of "entails" is indirect, compared to the more direct "consists of". --Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 07:40, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
This is going to sound harsh, but I mean this in the nicest way possible. Please resign adminship at BN. Each one of your responses to my questions is catastrophically wrong and neither represents nor reflects current practices/policies/guidelines. I've reviewed your block history and it looks like you have been making bad blocks for years. I know you've done great work for us in the past, but it's time to hang up the tools. Please do the right thing and resign. If you don't, I'll have no choice but to escalate this to ANI and possibly ArbCom. Thanks, Fastily 08:39, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Not to rehash nearly forgotten bygones, but it remains my understanding that (1) “Administrators must not block users with whom they are engaged in a content dispute; instead, they should report the problem to other administrators” and (2) a “cooling off time... intended solely to ‘cool down’ an angry user” is out of bounds. The block I endured for those reasons is small peanuts, yet the lack of accountability still chafes. A simple "my bad, sorry" from Ancheta (re the rationale for the block and administrative involvement in the pertinent editing dispute) would have kept me from weighing in here, but if my experience reflects a pattern of administrative irregularity, something needs to be done. Kent Dominic·(talk) 13:51, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
@Kent Dominic: Ancheta Wis has resigned their tools. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:01, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
@Hey man im josh: Where is that documented? Kent Dominic·(talk) 01:08, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
@Kent Dominic: You can see here or here. Hey man im josh (talk) 01:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
@Ancheta Wis: Solely re the substance of the pertinent edit to Mathematics: I downloaded H.S. Wall's Creative Mathematics pdf to check the quote you attributed to that source. The quote is nowhere to be found in the corpus of that pdf. I stand by [my original substitution] of "entails" (i.e., requires or necessarily involves) for "consists of" as explained in the corresponding edit summary. I'm surprised Bryan Henderson (giraffedata) never had a kick at the polysemic consists of cat. Kent Dominic·(talk) 01:26, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
See p.xii of Creative Mathematics (the AMS .pdf version). In it, H.S.Wall says:

A proof of a theorem consists of a suitable succession of statements each of which is completely justified. It has been my experience that there will be about as many different proofs of certain theorems as there are students who have proved them in my classes. I would not say that one of these proofs is better than another. Different people think in different ways and all should be encouraged. It is thus that new ideas are born!

You can see how Professor H.S.Wall lets his students each unearth their own path to a proof of the theorem under study, without their having to look up the proof in the work of other mathematicians. -- Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 09:27, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
@Ancheta Wis: You've perfectly illustrated the root of my contention. Namely, the Mathematics article seemingly purports that an axiom's "proof consists of..." By contrast, H.S. Wall asserts that a theorem's "proof consists of..." I trust you'll agree that an axiom, per se, isn't amenable to a proof but is instead a proposition that is assumed to be true without proof. Hence, I continue to defend the statement that "in modern mathematics—entities that are stipulated to have certain properties, called axioms. A proof [i.e., contextually relating to 'axiom' but equivocally relating, perhaps, to 'mathematical proof'] entails a succession of applications of deductive rules to already established results." Accordingly, I suggest that you do one or more of the following:
  • Restore my edit substituting "entails" for "consists of"
  • Qualify "A proof" so that it instead reads "A theorem's proof" (or, alternatively, to "A mathematical proof")
  • Reconfigure the ensuing sentence so that "previously proved" cannot be construed to operate distributively to axioms but in in a way that operates solely to theorems (e.g., From "These results include previously proved theorems, axioms, and..." to "These results include axioms, previously proved theorems, and..."
  • Bifurcate the entire paragraph so that the discussion of axioms is more clearly distinguished from the discussion of theorems.
Kent Dominic·(talk) 12:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
For a mathematical object under study, axioms and definitions are taken without proof. A mathematician can select axioms, and can define salient properties of the object under study.
For example, in homotopy type theory Voevodsky formulated a univalence axiom but there are multiple ways to express the axiom. In one of those formulations, univalence is a type, and the u. axiom is that the type under study has an inhabitant. These concepts are new and have not yet become canonical among mathematicians. To use your vocabulary, it remains to be decided just 'what entails what'. -- Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 14:24, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Your reply, excluding the last sentence, goes without saying despite being tangential to the issues I identified above. To reiterate, the Mathematics article says:
These objects consist of either abstractions from nature or—in modern mathematics—entities that are stipulated to have certain properties, called axioms. A proof consists of..."
The given instance of proof semantically qualifies "axiom." That clearly is not the contextually intended meaning. Since you yourself quoted H.S. Wall's assertion re "proof of a theorem" and since you also understand that definitions and axioms are taken without proof, it should be plain to see that the verbiage in the Mathematics article, as it's currently written, fails to identify the relevant proof as either a mathematical proof or as a theorem's proof but ridiculously presents it – given its collocation with axiom – as an axiom's proof.
Whether using "consists of" or "entails", the current wording nonetheless requires qualifying proof of what. That's why I suggested (but you ignored) that you might qualify "A proof" so that it instead reads "A theorem's proof" (or, alternatively, "A mathematical proof") so it doesn't continue to read as an axiom's proof. You also failed to comment on the pitifully constructed distributive syntax re "These results include previously proved theorems, axioms..." verbiage. It's a simple fix to properly edit it as ""These results include axioms, previously proved theorems, and..." Kent Dominic·(talk) 17:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Administrators' newsletter – February 2024

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

CheckUser changes

removed Wugapodes

Interface administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

  • Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

  • Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
  • Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous


Administrators' newsletter – March 2024

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

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)

Miscellaneous


Administrators' newsletter – April 2024

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

Administrator changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.

I want to create a short description for this article but have no idea where to start. It is so dense with military jargon that it is nigh-understandable—I'd be fine with this, given the field, if just the lead section were more understandable. Is the split mentioned in the hatnote complete? Sammi Brie (she/her • tc) 02:32, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the split is largely complete. The transformation allows the US Army to fight in large-scale ground combat operations (against Russia or China etc.), while avoiding large-scale waste of US military lives. See call for fire.
Transformation is the reason for seeking US machines (drones) to fly near the adversary, and for using satellites to communicate a situation across the globe in seconds. This is called JADC2.
The chief problem for the Army is to convince adversaries (especially their commanders, and ultimately their nations) that combat is futile in the face of such knowledge. This is called deterrence. -- Ancheta Wis   (talk | contribs) 06:09, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2024

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

Administrator changes

readded Nyttend
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed Nihonjoe

CheckUser changes

readded Joe Roe

Oversight changes

removed GeneralNotability

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Administrators' newsletter – June 2024

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

Administrator changes

readded Graham Beards
removed

Bureaucrat changes

removed

Oversight changes

removed Dreamy Jazz

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Quality of your recent edits

You have been doing a lot of "reference spamming" on pages related to missile/space defense recently. If something is already sufficiently referenced, please do not add more references, or if you have a higher quality reference, replace the old reference. For example the page Space Development Agency was absolutely full of garbage that I just deleted. Please don't do that type of editing. Additionally is the problematic use of excessive embedded notes. There was like 4 or 5 levels deep of embedded {{efn}} templates creating a confusing almost circular loop of notes. I also see this type of editing on United States Army Futures Command where there's hundreds of references, for something that needs substantially fewer and excessive embedded notes. Ergzay (talk) 20:42, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2024

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

Administrator changes

added
removed

Technical news

Miscellaneous


Administrators' newsletter – August 2024

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

Administrator changes

readded Isabelle Belato
removed

Interface administrator changes

readded Izno

CheckUser changes

removed Barkeep49

Technical news

  • Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
  • Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.

Arbitration


Administrators' newsletter – September 2024

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

Administrator changes

removed Pppery

Interface administrator changes

removed Pppery

Oversighter changes

removed Wugapodes

CheckUser changes

removed

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, there is a new criterion for speedy deletion: C4, which applies to unused maintenance categories, such as empty dated maintenance categories for dates in the past.
  • A request for comment is open to discuss whether Notability (species) should be adopted as a subject-specific notability guideline.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

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

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

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

Administrator changes

readded
removed

CheckUser changes

removed Maxim

Oversighter changes

removed Maxim

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

Miscellaneous