Following a discussion, the speedy deletion reason "File pages without a corresponding file" has been moved from criterion G8 to F2. This does not change what can be speedily deleted.
As with the Chad McQueen article, they've been accusing us of 'advertising' for adding information that's relevant, and it looks like they are deliberately shifting around IPs.Yogue (talk) 02:14, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Acroterion. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.MWFwiki (talk) 00:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
A Barnstar for You!
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
Thank you for your quick attention to my request! Your otherwise thankless work is much appreciated :)
Hi there, I saw you were on the list of active admins and I think we've edited in some of the same spaces before. I just wanted to keep admin aware that the GSL talk page is especially active these days which is of course partially my fault (involved). Just giving a heads up that there is current discussion on the talk page and at NPOVN.
OK, but unless there's clear-cut misbehavior administrators won't intervene in a discussion one way or another, at least not in an administrative capacity. Acroterion(talk)02:48, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
I took a quick look at the talkpage and while it's a voluminous, unresolved discussion, it looked like everybody's being reasonably respectful, or at least are not actively fighting. In any case, it's getting late and I'm wrapping things up for the day. Acroterion(talk)03:22, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
Hi Acroterion. You recently blocked two accounts (Cavil5715 and Adelewhite125) for socking, and I bet that Krisheven425 is another sock in the same drawer. Same type of posting on their user talk page, about finding web development companies. --Drm310🍁 (talk) 14:25, 11 October 2024 (UTC)
Thanks
I was actively monitoring Special:Contributions/2001:4454:26B:CE00:99BE:52BD:2B8C:9EF2 (that is, literally reloading the page every five seconds) when I saw you had blocked the IP range. I was not expecting it to be resolved so quickly, so thank you. - ZLEAT\C04:39, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Most current airliner pages are on my watchlist because they're favored by two or three LTAs, so it was pretty clear somebody was acting up. Glad I was able to cut that short. Acroterion(talk)12:55, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Hi Acroterion. Would you mind restoring the visibility of the reverted edits made at this page? I've previously discussed with two other admins about the issue of hiding death-related revisions from this talkpage, which can be seen here. Thanks, ‑‑Neveselbert (talk· contribs · email) 21:54, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
I disagree with Primefac's view that "we get death notices all the time, they're easily checked and not that serious of a BLP vio." In my view, maliciously stating that an elderly (or any) person is dead is as serious as it gets, and we have enough ghoulish fascination with being first to report someone's death that we don't need to encourage the trolls. And this is an LTA, so "purely disruptive" comes into play, with WP:DENY. Primefac's entitled to his opinion, but I see no value in unhiding the abuse. That said, if someone else thinks it's fine, they are free to do it. Acroterion(talk)23:20, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
RD is somewhat subjective. I have stated my opinion on the matter, but I don't necessarily feel strongly enough to push the issue or reverse the RD. Feel free to take it up at a more centralised noticeboard if you feel that these sorts of things should be more standardised. Primefac (talk) 11:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
I agree, the boundaries aren't clear. I tend to resist defining things rigidly, since rigid boundaries can be tested or exploited, and we have as much instruction creep as anybody can stand already. I am not wholly in disagreement about death vandalism; checking really famous people is trivially easy. It's the less obvious or easy-to-check cases that are more pernicious. Acroterion(talk)13:37, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
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.
It certainly earns a block for racist vandalism. It's not awful enough for revdel though, it can remain as a memorial to that editor's behavior. Acroterion(talk)19:13, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
There is no unanimous opinion on the threshold for revdel, which is probably a good thing, since over-specificity is a temptation for the malicious to see what they can get away with. Another admin may disagree, and there are things that I revdel that other admins might not. The most important thing is that the vandal is blocked. Acroterion(talk)19:20, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
I think I've come across an LTA
But I can't quite place where it was or the possible socking... I seem to remember something about an obsession with adding numbers to articles, with adding ages at the time of death to articles, numbering people's stations in life in articles (including infoboxes for First Ladies of the US). Please see this edit history. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 15:16, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
I can't say I've seen that particular editing pattern, at least not that I remember.. I would think it should be easy to spot via a properly constituted query, which might give more clue. Acroterion(talk)15:52, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Lol you assume I can put together a properly constituted query? (not even sure what a query is, I just edit stuff around here...) I'll continue to poke around my old edits over the next few days, I know I've seen this editing pattern before... Somewhere. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 17:14, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
The draft was deleted by another Wikipedia administrator after it was declined for non-notability. The deletion reason was that it was promotional. If you have questions about that, you should contact the deleting administrator. Acroterion(talk)12:22, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
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
Hello, Acroterion. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.JeffSpaceman (talk) 13:32, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
You've got mail
Hello, Acroterion. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.JeffSpaceman (talk) 21:46, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.
Your account was just registered after the other account was blocked, you're demanding retribution against one of the editors involved in that discussion, and while not particularly kind, you're not being insulted. Acroterion(talk)01:28, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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.
Hey uh this may seem too late to say this but you seem to forgot to hide this when doing the other edits from Susan Wojcicki in 2022 50.5.128.109 (talk) 03:47, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Acroterion. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.JeffSpaceman (talk) 15:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Because undiscussed pagemoves are disruptive. Articles should not be moved on a whim. New editors don't necessarily know that, so they are warned. The warning was given nine months ago, I assume you have a better understanding of move protocols now. Acroterion(talk)17:51, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
I wanted to know why you gave the level 2 warning instead of the level 1 warning (I've attached the level 1 warning below the level 2 warning so you know what I'm talking about):
I looked at your edits around that time and decided a slightly stronger wording was appropriate. It's a mild admonishment, not a stain on your Permanent Record. Do you really think it's a good use of your time to come back nine months later to wrangle about it? Acroterion(talk)23:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Following an RFC, the policy on restoration of adminship has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, T5, has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.
Technical news
Technical volunteers can now register for the 2025 Wikimedia Hackathon, which will take place in Istanbul, Turkey. Application for travel and accommodation scholarships is open from November 12 to December 10, 2024.
Hello, Acroterion. 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 at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
It's not a problem, administrators are here to help editors write the encyclopedia. I'll take a look at them and undelete if appropriate. Acroterion(talk)14:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi Acroterion. I saw you reblocked this IP, but I can't seem to find any more recent activity from them. Is there something that happened? Thanks. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 06:40, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Hey there Acroterion. I just came across an IP address that you previously blocked. I blocked them again for a period of three days (due to messing around with pages). They have been repeatedly warned in the past, and blocked twice. Was I correct to block someone after being blocked twice in the past and having repeated warnings, or should I have done a warning first? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:16, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
If they're doing the same sorts of things that got them blocked the first two times, we can assume they know better already and are just blowing us off. Technically, warnings aren't required, but AGF would demand it until we can safely discard that courtesy. Acroterion(talk)00:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Hi Acroterion, sorry to disturb, but the IP you blocked for edit warring at the Moorgate tube crash article has come off their block and jumped straight back into reverting again. They have, at least, commented on the talk page, but I’m not sure that anything said there is going to stop the disruption. Should I apply for temporary page protection to focus their efforts on the talk page alone? Thanks SchroCat (talk) 00:25, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
How about not lying about me, not trying to force jargon that nobody has used in decades into the article, not reverting just for the sake of reverting, and talking to me instead of childishly trying to get me blocked again. 81.111.22.107 (talk) 00:44, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Stalking too? I have not lied about you: you have come off a block for edit warring and carried in with the same disruptive behaviour. I have explained the rationale on the talk page as to why the current phrasing is better, and it has nothing to do with ‘reverting just for the sake of reverting’: that’s an untruthful claim right there. How about you use the article talk page to try and counter the explanation put forward, rather than just edit warring? SchroCat (talk) 00:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Many thanks to you both. If they return at a future point, hopefully they'll aim for the talk page first to discuss properly. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 11:20, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello Acroterion -- I won't revert but actually I disagree strongly with this tagging. Imo, single source is intended for articles where (1) the fact it pends off a single source is a significant problem (because the source is unreliable for some reason), or (2) the fact that the meat of an article is from one source is not obvious from the reference list (because there are a mass of trivial sources). In this case, the source appears reliable, independent and secondary.
It is my strong belief based on the behaviour of the sock Lamptonian, as well as the userboxes on the sock master, that the intent of almost all their edits was to discredit material about liberal/feminist/queer academics or similar, and I'm sad to see this goal achieved in this case. I'm busy right now, but I will try to look for another source when I have a moment; I assume reviews of the subject's work will be available. Did you search for one and fail to find it? If so you should state this explicitly. Regards, Espresso Addict (talk) 06:57, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Feel free to revert. I was trying to sample the good, bad and indifferernt edits Lamptonian made. That one falls into "indifferent." As I've said elsewhere, it will take months to properly search and improve the articles Lamptonian tagged or slashed. Acroterion(talk)14:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
X
Diese Website benutzt Cookies. Wenn du die Website weiter nutzt, gehe Ich von Deinem Einverständnis aus.OKNeinDatenschutzerklärung
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
Arbitration
Miscellaneous
Oversighter changes
Technical news
Interface administrator changes
