Administrators' newsletter – April 2022
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).
- An RfC is open proposing a change to the minimum activity requirements for administrators.
- Access to Special:RevisionDelete has been expanded to include users who have the
deletelogentry
anddeletedhistory
rights. This means that those in the Researcher user group and Checkusers who are not administrators can now access Special:RevisionDelete. The users able to view the special page after this change are the 3 users in the Researcher group, as there are currently no checkusers who are not already administrators. (T301928) - When viewing deleted revisions or diffs on Special:Undelete a back link to the undelete page for the associated page is now present. (T284114)
- Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Procedures § Opening of proceedings has been updated to reflect current practice following a motion.
- A arbitration case regarding Skepticism and coordinated editing has been closed.
- A arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been opened.
- Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines has closed, and the results were that 56.98% of voters supported the guidelines. The results of this vote mean the Wikimedia Foundation Board will now review the guidelines.
Party colorcode
Hello, how can I find the color codes of political parties? I need to learn as code.--Nushirevan11 (talk) 20:30, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
- The colour codes of political parties are in the data subpages of Module:Political party. Primefac (talk) 20:34, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
Query
Hello, Primefac,
Since you are a functionary, I imagine you are a part of all of the discussions that go on behind-the-scenes so I had a question for you:In the past year, I've noticed that when an active editor of Wikipedia passes, their account is blocked. This is especially true if they were a long-time editor or an administrator. Has this been discussed anywhere or is it just an informal custom that has evolved over the past few years?
I ask because I came across an edit by a deceased administrator whose account wasn't blocked and I wasn't sure if it was appropriate for me to block it or if I should ask a functionary or bureaucrat to do so. I don't expect to run into this again but I thought I'd ask you, as you are more up-to-date on policies and guidelines than just about anyone else I can think of. Thank you, in advance, and I hope you are having a pleasant weekend. Liz Read! Talk! 21:02, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
- As far as I am aware, we are not in the habit of blocking deceased users, per WP:DWG, though advanced permissions are almost always removed as a matter of course, which in your case would need to involve a bureaucrat to remove said bit. Primefac (talk) 06:42, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
- ... and deceased editor's accounts are "usually" locked by the stewards per same. Izno (talk) 06:57, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Primefac and Izno,
- Just finally circling back to see your answer to my query. I guess I shouldn't have been vague and hypothetical, the admin whose account I came across is User:Dreadstar, an admin I greatly miss. We communicated a lot during the whole Gamergate debacle. He passed away a few years ago so probably before the current custom of indefinitely locking deceased admins' accounts. Liz Read! Talk! 23:16, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- ... and deceased editor's accounts are "usually" locked by the stewards per same. Izno (talk) 06:57, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
WP:AFC, April 2022
Hello there! I hope you are doing well today.
I just had a question about this edit that you made to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants page. You added my name to the "Probationary members" part of the page. What is that? Why was my name put there? Any and all answers are appreciated. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 13:08, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
- You meet the minimum requirements, but only just. Being on probation only means that you can be removed from the list for any reason without prior discussion. Primefac (talk) 15:27, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
Regarding some past moves
Hello again, Primefac. I had some concerns about some past moves you did when Wikipedia:Article wizard shifted to the current (version 3.0). Basically the pages that started their life at Wikipedia:Article wizard 2.0 currently reside at Wikipedia:Article wizard/version1 & the original version 1 was moved to Wikipedia:Article wizard/version1/old. Their current locations are kind of really weird. And I couldn't even find a discussion regarding the same, so assuming it was an unilateral move. If you don't have any concerns, can I move them to what should ideally be their name? I'll do all the link cleanup work. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • C • L) 13:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Please don't assume, we had a huge discussion about the revamp in 2017, and I wouldn't have moved someone else's draft wizard to live unilaterally. As we do not refer to them as anything other than "version 1" and "/old", I see little reason to complicate and potentially confuse matters by moving the pages yet again. Primefac (talk) 14:20, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Sure, I won't be doing another reshuffle. Thanks for your quick response. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • C • L) 14:27, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Article for deletion
You may not have seen these. There is an current AfD debate on two Project articles. Jax MN (talk) 15:27, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
My apology to you
If there's one thing I've learned, is that you always must keep your word with others. Especially in a strict field like wikipedia. As I said, reflecting, I think the reason why I got back into my higher quality files ship is because there was a specific poster I wanted to be on the inbox of the second sonic movie. Now that the film and the poster are finally out, I'm officially off the ship. My only question left is if there is a program used to reduce image size, tell me what is it cause I'd love to check it out. ChallengeCick (talk) 19:02, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- I don't really do much with files, so I couldn't tell the best way of reducing filesize; maybe ask at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content to see what's available. Primefac (talk) 09:38, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- I checked it out, but it doesn't seem so clear to me at a glance. Anyway, I suggest unblocking me one more time. I got into contact with ItsMarkWbu and awaiting a response regarding the situation. But for now, I suggest doing the smart thing AND the right thing by unblocking and giving me one more chance. I know the reason why you blocked me for file uploading. It's not because of uploading high quality NFFs. It's because I was forcing it to a point where it got a bit stupid. But thankfully (and I can say this with confidence), it's over! ChallengeCick (talk) 18:50, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
Clay Clark
Thank you for your evaluation of my draft on Clay Clark. My real interest in creating the draft was to highlight the Reawaken America tour, which is pulling together various strands of U.S. political discourse into one synergistic argument. Would you advise revising to shift the focus from Clark, who created the tour, to the tour itself? Thanks!AlterEgo813 (talk) 16:24, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- It sounds like it might be better to write a draft about the tour, then. Primefac (talk) 17:53, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you. That makes sense to me. AlterEgo813 (talk) 22:26, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Draft:Esther Hill Hawks (2)
Please advise me as to what I did wrong with this redirect which you did not delete. It had been tagged as {{db-afc-move}} by a reviewer who wished to accept the draft. I moved the redirect into draft space and changed the tagging to {{db-moved}}, which states that the page was tagged for deletion, and was then moved by a page mover. However, deletion is still considered non-controversial maintenance. We still don't need the moved redirect. I have now accepted the article on Esther Hill Hawks. Did I make some mistake in how I dealt with the redirect? Robert McClenon (talk) 15:06, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
- You're over-complicating things. If someone tags a page with db-afc-move, let an admin delete it and then they can accept the page. If there's a redirect in the way, as with Draft:Ice IV (3), don't worry about doing a formal page swap, just move the existing redirect to the draft space without leaving a redirect and then accept the draft. If you don't create unnecessary redirects while you're working, you don't need to G6 them, and as long as it's fairly obvious how Page A ended up as Draft:B then we're all good. Primefac (talk) 15:25, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
New administrator activity requirement
The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.
Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:
- Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
- Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period
Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.
22:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
birth of Virangana Uda Devi
according to the tradition of her family it was been celebrated on 30 june since a very long time . if you want to check the credibility of my information please check newspaper of 1july . I'm the grandchild of Rajeshwari Devi and she is the grandchild of Virangana Uda Devi. a lot of controversy is going on people trying to change the date .i request you to please update it . Lostboy priyanshu (talk) 11:53, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- Celebrating a birthday on a specific date does not necessarily mean that was the true birthday (look at Christmas or Presidents' Day), but if you have a source that says "they celebrate on this day because it was her birthday", or otherwise have a reliable source that indicates it's her birthday, then by all means feel free to re-add it along with the information. Primefac (talk) 11:15, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Template:Stephanie Mills vandalized again!
Primefac, the same vandalism again, with external link videos. Vandalism just never ends on this template. Can you protect it, or do something? Thanks. Best, --Discographer (talk) 20:28, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Sure; thought I had it on my watchlist already but I guess not. Done. Primefac (talk) 20:53, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 20:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Request
I've changed the name of a template (and as I'm an idiot, I've also made a big mess, then fixed). Can you please move the categories of the template? I can't do this as I'm not a page mover.
- Category:Belgian FA template using numeric ID -> Category:Royal Belgian Football Association template using numeric ID
- Category:Belgian FA template with ID different from Wikidata -> Category:Royal Belgian Football Association template with ID different from Wikidata
- Category:Belgian FA template with ID not in Wikidata -> Category:Royal Belgian Football Association template with ID not in Wikidata
- Category:Belgian FA template with ID not matching pattern -> Category:Royal Belgian Football Association template with ID not matching pattern
- Category:Belgian FA template missing ID and not in Wikidata -> Category:Royal Belgian Football Association template missing ID and not in Wikidata
In addition, I ask you to move this category as "players" is better than "footballers".
I've also sent you an email. Dr Salvus 20:55, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay, was away this weekend. I see that the categories have been nominated for speedy renaming, which is the proper procedure. I would advise doing so for the footballers cat as well. Email has been seen, just haven't had the opportunity to catch up on the various responses from over the weekend. Primefac (talk) 11:13, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
IPBE
No objection to the removal of the flag; I almost removed it myself when I removed the "extended confirmed" flag, but I saw at the time that a half dozen or so other administrators also had that flag, so I figured I'd leave it alone. Just curious, do the administrators who keep that flag need it solely for Tor usage? (I don't use Tor, so that wouldn't affect me.) As a side note, I saw a few other administrators still had the extended confirmed flag, which puzzled me a bit, but I didn't dig into it at the time. 28bytes (talk) 02:56, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) @28bytes: From a technical standpoint, the only reason that they should need it is for Tor usage via the torunblocked userright. Users in the 'Administrators' group already can bypass simple IP blocks via the ipblock-exempt userright. SQLQuery Me! 06:10, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Wikimedia Foundation Inc. is corrupt and bad
Hello. Wikimedia Foundation Inc. is corrupt and bad. I'm not sure why you're attempting to defend the organization or why you feel it's your place to. I wish you would stop. Since you asked for evidence, here is a very easy example. And it's even posted to a village pump. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:43, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- I am not defending anyone, I am removing a problematic statement from a location where it will do no good. The user page in question is a role account, and thus is not used as a forum for discussion or change, or even as a contact for anyone other than that committee. I can understand the temptation to shout into the void in the hopes that someone will hear you, but ask yourself this - what are you trying to accomplish with your posts? If you want people to take your concerns seriously, simply saying "WMF is bad!" isn't going to do any more than those that shout out that Facebook is evil or Amazon is run by a greedy man with a space rocket. Change isn't easy, but hand-wavey complaining isn't going to do much to affect change, and if it happens often enough it gets disruptive. Primefac (talk) 05:59, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Removal on AfC Participants list
Hello, I haven't reviewed AfC submissions in a while and I'd like to have my name removed from the participants list. —Danre98(talk^contribs) 01:48, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Discussion at WP:HD § Request for template editor
You are invited to join the discussion at WP:HD § Request for template editor. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:38, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Primefac. Maybe you could take a look at this? The OP's account is only about a month old. They might enthusiatically want to help with this part of Wikipedia, but some of their recent edits seem to indicate they might not be yet experienced enough for such things. For example, I'm not really sure why their edit to Template:Uw-uhblock/sandbox was needed. Anyway, since you're experienced with templates, maybe you could give this editor some advice. They also might gain experience by joining WP:WPT. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:45, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
Updates to bureaucrat minimum activity requirements
Hello Primefac.
Following a discussion at the Bureaucrats' noticeboard, the minimum activity requirements for bureaucrats have been updated to also include the the recently updated minimum editing requirements for administrators (i.e. at least 100 edits every 5 years). This will be enforced beginning in January 2023. Should you no longer wish to volunteer as a bureaucrat you may request removal at SRP and.or let us know at WP:BN.
Best regards, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:37, 22 April 2022 (UTC)