Jump to content

User talk:Mojo Hand/Archive 2021

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 2015←Archive 2019Archive 2020Archive 2021Archive 2022

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes). The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason).
  • Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

A bit of help here?

Could you please block Pushforatonofgold, it's a sock of Evlekis. TPA will also need to be revoked. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 16:16, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Looks like BethNaught beat me to it :). --Mojo Hand (talk) 16:21, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Yep, though thanks for helping out as an admin. Sorry to bother you, have a great day :-) Pahunkat (talk) 16:36, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
No bother at all. Cheers.--Mojo Hand (talk) 16:43, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of BGYO (group) page

Hello, I'm interested in recreating the page for BGYO (group) that you deleted earlier as requested by community members who said the group should be debuted before a page can be created for them. I am also adding more citations from secondary sources. Since the group has already debuted, I was wondering if you could give me some advice before I set up the page?

Thank you, User:SenyorOtter (talk) 01:31, 30 January 2021 (AST)

Hello SenyorOtter. As the AFD just closed a week ago, I would advise not rushing to create a new page. In addition, it's often a good idea to start a new article in your user space and invite input from another editor interested in the topic.
I also see that some of the concerns in the AFD were that the band hadn't yet officially debuted or released a single. If that has now changed, then the argument for having the article is stronger.
I hope this helps. Cheers.--Mojo Hand (talk) 16:34, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
I see, thank you very much Mojo Hand! I'll keep your advice in mind. This really helps.
Best, User:SenyorOtter (talk) 11:25, 01 February 2021 (AST)

Edits to Politics of Virginia

Hello. Your message regarding my edit to the Politics of Virginia page says merely that it "seemed" less than neutral. I would be very grateful if you would check the sources I have used, which appear as footnotes, to verify that everything added is true. Jon Liss has aligned with Liberation Road (as well as the Communist Party USA and other hard-left groups), but discussing the "Inside-Outside" network as a model for political action. There is nothing non-objective about this, and New Virginia Majority has played a significant role in turning Virginia from "red" to "blue." It even has claimed credit for this in the New York Times. Thank you. ~~~~

Hello Goldstein2021. Your edits have now been challenged by three different editors - please do not continue to add the same content without addressing concerns on the article talk page. Your addition does have some sources, but the overall sourcing and tone of the addition are not consistent with Wikipedia policies. In addition to the concerns about sourcing and bias, three paragraphs about the "New Virginia Movement" adds undue weight to the topic in a relatively short article that is supposed to cover the entire history of politcs in Virgnina.
One's politics should never be obvious in the contributions one makes to articles.Mojo Hand (talk) 16:29, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Mojo Hand: Well, well. My edits have been challenged by "three different editors" (presumably you mean yourself, Diannaa, and ...? The third remains obscure to me). This is customarily disappointing from Wikipedia, and only goes further toward explaining the worldwide loss of faith in the platform's objectivity. There isn't even any mention of federal elections in 2020, nor any discussion of the activism that caused the state to turn completely "blue." In fact, the State Power Caucus (of which New Virginia Majority is a part) proved decisive in Virginia, and it is a fact that the founder of both the State Power Caucus and NVM has aligned with far-left organizations (as the sources authored by him, and provided by me, clearly demonstrate). Jon Liss is a hard-left political activist in Virginia, and also apparently an apologist for Maoism and the Chinese Communist regime. The connection of some of these hard-left groups to Communist China can be traced through the Black Lives Matter organization, which has received financial support from the Chinese government (or Chinese Communist Party). It is not outrageous to conclude that Wikipedia, in light of its effort to suppress this information, also receives financial support from the Chinese government, meaning that it cannot afford to highlight facts that might generate public outrage about Chinese Communist Party involvement in American society, the American economy, or American politics. That is a great pity. Goldstein2021 (talk) 17:36, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Trying to maintain objectivity in articles is a huge challenge for Wikipedia, as bias is inevitable when content is generated by millions of users, many of whom have strong political opinions. That's why one of my primary goals in editing is to focus on the neutral point of view as much as possible. As a result, I've been accused of being both liberal and conservative, while no one here really knows were my personal political beliefs lie. I've had some success over the years in building consensus over controversial topics, and I strongly recommend using the WP:BRD method. Mojo Hand (talk) 21:35, 15 February 2021 (UTC). FWIW - the editors who have had concerns with your edits are me, Diannaa, Avillar86 and an IP editor.

Administrators' newsletter – February 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).

Administrator changes

added TJMSmith
removed Boing! said Zebedee • Hiberniantears • Lear's Fool • Only • WGFinley

Interface administrator changes

added AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
  • When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
  • There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

A question regarding bundled AfDs

Hi. You recently closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meg Meeker as keep, while noting that consensus was less clear regarding Strong Fathers, Strong Daughters. I noticed that XFDcloser added the {{old AfD multi}} template to Talk:Strong Fathers, Strong Daughters with the result listed as keep, even though you did not close the discussion with consensus to keep the book. Is there a workaround in the {{old AfD multi}} template to accommodate situations like this where a bundled AfD is closed with consensus to keep one page but not the other? I ask because I went ahead and redirected the book to Meeker's article, and it's misleading to have a template on the talk page saying there was consensus to keep the article at AfD. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 03:31, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Lord Bolingbroke. Sorry for the delay in responding - I've been off Wiki for a bit. You make a valid point, and I adjusted the template on Talk:Strong Fathers, Strong Daughters to provide more context to the close. Cheers. --Mojo Hand (talk) 15:06, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, that looks good to me. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 15:08, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS

Guideline and policy news

  • Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
  • Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.

Technical news

  • When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
  • Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).

Administrator changes

removed Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

removed Ragesoss

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The user group oversight will be renamed to suppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

strait laced

You reverted my correction of "straight laced" to "strait laced". https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Boardwalk_Empire&type=revision&diff=1023291948&oldid=1023289055 Look it up in a dictionary. "Strait" = tight, as in a tightly laced corset. "straight" makes no sense. https://writingexplained.org/idiom-dictionary/straight-laced "The correct spelling of this phrase is strait-laced. Referring to something as straight-laced is a confusion of the words strait and straight, which are not the same." Also http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/strait-laced https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/strait_laced Enough people misspell it to make it seem odd, but "strait" is undoubtedly correct. 111.220.83.242 (talk) 11:15, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for judging this on the merits. 111.220.83.242 (talk) 07:33, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Blue Cha Cha and Henry Levy House

Hola. What on earth happened here? Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Honestly I have no idea. Seems to be some kind of glitch with the Wikipedia:XFDcloser script.--Mojo Hand (talk) 14:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DYTJ

Greetings. Question, you closed this as keep, and while the !votes do show that preponderance, all the keep !votes are based on WP:BCAST, which is part of WP:NMEDIA, and never address GNG. WP:SNG says "Editors are cautioned that these WikiProject notability guidance pages should be treated as essays and do not establish new notability standards, lacking the weight of broad consensus of the general and subject-specific notability guidelines in various discussions" Can I ask your thoughts? The reason I'm curious is that other recent SNG's (e.g. NFOOTY, NCRIC) have recently started to be re-evaluated and to no longer trump GNG. Thoughts? Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 15:37, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Yeah - I really debated relisting the AFD on the grounds that there was no real discussion on the quality of the sources, and the focus was purely on the SNG - which I agree is not ideal. However, given the current consensus at the AFD, I figured that a relist would, at most, result in a no-consensus close.
The tension between the GNG and the SNG's has been going on as long as I can remember, though it seems like we are glacially making progress towards more sensible and consistent treatment of articles on the margins of the SNGs. Personally, I think lists or group articles for subjects that only get routine coverage or merely technically meet the SNG is probably the best long term solution. However, that broader consensus ought to come at the guideline or SNG page level. That said, arguments at individual AFDs can be the spark to motivate those larger discussion, but that kind of fight didn't seem to be developing at this particular AFD.--Mojo Hand (talk) 18:55, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the detailed response. I agree there are 4 or 5 dedicated editors who like to uphold the sanctity of BCAST (all of whom cast their !votes every single time on one of these pages is nominated). Beyond that core, I haven't seen a broad consensus that the SNG should trump GNG. I appreciate your viewpoint, and I totally agree that these types of stations are better handled in list articles. However, I still think that GNG should be upheld. But again, thank you. Onel5969 TT me 22:14, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).

Administrator changes

added Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless
removed Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:45, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
  • An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news

  • IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious
Nine years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:28, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Neutrality

Hello. My edit was a neutral POV. I never stated that there was fraud. Simply, allegations of fraud. I never said whether they were true or false. Thank you. 17:05, 2 August 2021 (talk) 13:04, 2 Aug 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I understand that you are trying to be more neutral in the way you present the information. However, in Wikipedia, using general words like "alleged" or "many claim" without citing who is making the allegations is considered a type of unsupported attribution - see WP:Weasel. It is always better to state who is making the allegations and provide a source, especially in statements related to politics.--Mojo Hand (talk) 22:58, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

  • Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:18, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

The National Conference Center Good Article Reassessment

The National Conference Center, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. --Whiteguru (talk) 05:20, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

readded Jake Wartenberg
removed Emperor • Viridian Bovary
renamed Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:45, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
  • Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
  • The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

  • Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
  • The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:04, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

My edit on The Braxtons

I'm a little confused as to what's so unconstructive about updating sources to their modern locations?--141.157.254.24 (talk) 14:02, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Phase 2 of the 2021 RfA review has commenced which will discuss potential solutions to address the 8 issues found in Phase 1. Proposed solutions that achieve consensus will be implemented and you may propose solutions till 07 November 2021.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

WP:ROA

I think I misclicked and accidentally tagged it for deletion. I did not mean for that to happen. EthanGaming7640 (talk) 23:46, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

The deletion request was actually from 力, who created the redirect. The user’s rationale was, “The proposal to use this shortcut fizzled out”. Mojo Hand (talk) 03:13, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Yup. No point pretending the short-link to a failed proposal will work in the future. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 04:26, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Candice

You were wrong to fix it. I was adding the truth of what other castmayes have stated. Biggienerdz (talk) 15:08, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Insults and personal opinions do not belong on Wikipedia.--Mojo Hand (talk) 15:30, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Jared Polis Edit

The edit was made by a shared IP, I did not vandalize the page, and for what it is worth I am a supporter of his. Thank you for reverting it and removing the vandalism.

206.168.44.220 (talk) 16:22, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

No worries - those edits were from 2018, and we know that IP addresses frequently change.--Mojo Hand (talk) 16:37, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Barbi Afrika

I created her page last year and it is true that back in the day she did not have that many reliable sources nor she was notable enough to fit into Wikipedia, but things changed drastically now that I did a research. When it comes to being a singer, Barbi Afrika had few singles charting in music, and when it comes to being a TikToker, she even won the award for being the TikToker of the year 2021. She was even nominated in the same category in 2020., and she was as well nominated on the MAC Music Awards Ceremony held in Belgrade in 2020. She is mentioned in many news and other sources in various languages and can be seen on national TV and radio as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Serbiawiki (talk • contribs) 17:29, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello Serbiawiki and sorry for the slow response. I looked at the new page you created compared to the one deleted at AFD, and honestly they didn't look that different. If Barbi Afrika is someone who is generating more coverage over time, then a good way to start the article may be as a draft. There you can develop the article and get some feedback, without as much scrutiny as you get in the main Wiki space.--Mojo Hand (talk) 16:05, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

An issue at List of Disney Channel original films

Hi, a more experienced user is calling my updating references “disruptive” and “not constructive” but left a warning on my page before starting a genuine conversation. His refusal to discuss really feels like “Rules for thee not for me”. Would you be able to help me out?--141.157.254.24 (talk) 02:56, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

FTR, this IP has been disruptive at my Talk page before (c. October 7, 2021) so there's already a history here. And I've tried explaining exactly what this most recent issue was, though they continue to pretend they haven't heard it. In their defense, they have not tried to revert (that particular edit) since I've explained, so there is that. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:07, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
141.157.254.24 (talk · contribs) seems to have an unfortunate history of being labeled as unconstructive, when their edits are clearly in good faith. I know I was guilty of this, and I think we would all do better to discuss more and template less.--Mojo Hand (talk) 15:35, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
It really feels like IJ is trying to drag me through the mud and doesn’t like when they’re being called out for their behavior. Makes up claims that try to be definitive but in reality have no weight to them. Every intention of talking above me, but not with me, and won’t actually listen. I ask how I was being disruptive and unconstructive, I demonstrate exactly how neither are true, insists on the labels anyway.--141.157.254.24 (talk) 18:39, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi 141.157.254.24 (talk · contribs). Looking at your talk page, I tend to agree that the templates for unconstructive editing were not especially productive or friendly. Seems like IP editors clearly get less benefit of the doubt. I have found the WP:BRD process to be helpful when someone challenges my edits, so I do recommend that. I will also keep an eye on your talk page. However, my time on Wiki is inconsistent.--Mojo Hand (talk) 16:39, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:14, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2021).

Administrator changes

removed A Train • Berean Hunter • Epbr123 • GermanJoe • Sanchom • Mysid

Technical news

  • Unregistered editors using the mobile website are now able to receive notices to indicate they have talk page messages. The notice looks similar to what is already present on desktop, and will be displayed on when viewing any page except mainspace and when editing any page. (T284642)
  • The limit on the number of emails a user can send per day has been made global instead of per-wiki to help prevent abuse. (T293866)

Arbitration


Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:25, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

It wasn’t a mistake.

😉 172.250.154.212 (talk) 15:07, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

OK, but an edit suggesting she got her start writing fan fiction about a romance between Jesse Eisenberg and Andrew Garfield requires a reliable source.--Mojo Hand (talk) 15:10, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:06, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A t-shirt!
A token of thanks
Hi Mojo Hand! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~
A snowflake!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mojo_Hand/Archive_2021&oldid=1081947110"