User talk:Zero0000: Difference between revisions

There'sNoTime

Alex Shih • Brian • Mushroom • Nakon • Oscarthecat • PeruvianLlama • Ragib • Reaper Eternal • Rossami • Tom

Interface administrator changes

Evad37 • Galobtter

Ritchie333

CheckUser changes

There'sNoTime

Keegan • Ks0stm

Oversight changes

There'sNoTime

Ks0stm • Sphilbrick

Guideline and policy news

The RfC on administrator activity requirements failed to reach consensus for any proposal.
Following discussions at the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and Wikipedia talk:Administrators, an earlier change to the restoration of adminship policy was reverted. If requested, bureaucrats will not restore administrator permissions removed due to inactivity if there have been five years without a logged administrator action; this "five year rule" does not apply to permissions removed voluntarily.

Technical news

A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.

Arbitration

The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
- paid-en-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
- checkuser-en-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.

Miscellaneous

Following the 2019 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Base, Einsbor, Jon Kolbert, Schniggendiller, and Wim b.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:13, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

1920 Paulet–Newcombe map?

I have moved the thread to Talk:Paulet–Newcombe Agreement as better to have it there for posterity. Onceinawhile (talk) 11:30, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

Administrator changes

Reaper Eternal • ThaddeusB

Bogdangiusca • Christopher Parham • Necrothesp • Schneelocke • Siroxo • Sarah

Mentifisto → Lofty abyss

Interface administrator changes

Mr. Stradivarius

Bureaucrat changes

View additional information

Kingturtle

Technical news

In Special:Preferences under "Appearance" → "Advanced options", there is now an option to show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Please see meta:Community health initiative/User reporting system consultation 2019 to provide your input on this idea.

Arbitration

The Arbitration Committee clarified that the General 1RR prohibition for Palestine-Israel articles may only be enforced on pages with the {{ARBPIA 1RR editnotice}} edit notice.

Miscellaneous

Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

te and iw

Do you remember any of the articles where IW made classic tendentious arguments? Im thinking of wholesale removal of text as "off-topic", making opposing arguments based off POV and such things. I got Rouzan al-Najjar already, combing through others but you may have a better memory than I do. nableezy - 16:38, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

this is what I have compiled so far. nableezy - 17:10, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget BOOMERANGS are possible, as always in this place. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 19:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Nableezy, see this: Talk:Elie_Wiesel/Archive_2#Molestation_allegations (*one* woman had accused EW of molestation, reported in RS): Icewhiz argues against including it in his bio.

Then, a month later, see Talk:Linda_Sarsour/Archive_10#Asmi_Fathelbab_allegations: a woman alleges that Linda Sarsour did nothing when she was allegedly molested by a coworker (Sarsour was their boss): : Icewhiz argues for including it in her bio. (Haaretz just repeated my claim about hypocrisy or double standards, but didn't say why I had called it that,) Huldra (talk) 20:53, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Think thats outside of ARBPIA. Yes ARBBLP, but not ARBPIA. nableezy - 20:54, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators will take action if it can be simply shown that an editor's behaviour is disruptive. They will not want to be asked to make judgements about whether an individual's line of argumentation is consistently tendentious. Unless it shows that an editor's approach is wildly outside the norm for a contentious subject area, I suspect that putting together a complex case runs the risk of looking like victimisation, harassment or a vendetta and itself being seen as problematic. Sorry if I expressed that patronisingly, but I thought it was worth saying. Having said the above, I think it might be useful to have a conversation which clarifies what the problems are. ← ZScarpia 11:09, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting stuff: Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland. ← ZScarpia 12:29, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Netanyahu’s “water” overture, June 2018

I have reversed your removal of well-sourced material relevant to Iran-Israel relations, and dispute the notion that because a poliician makes an overture that some subjective viewers might judge to be a cynical—an offer the recipient is not expected to take up—it is somehow unnewsworthy or irrelevant to the article at hand. I would think such offers to be relevant regardless of their effectiveness. Please have a look at the YouTube video created by Netanyahu himself. Perhaps it deserves to be mentioned in a different place in the article? Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 02:06, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Vesuvius Dogg: This is the sort of stuff that happens every other day. It is just propaganda noise and had no significance at the time and will have no significance in the future. Also, presenting this as a genuine offer amounts to accepting a claim from one side and thus is an NPOV violation. Netanyahu is not stupid enough to really think that Iran and Israel will cooperate on water conservation. It would be much better to cover public relations at a higher level from independent analysts. This is what I mean, though I'm not saying that is a good source. Zero^talk 02:28, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. It would be worthy if it was in an article like Iran Watar problems or something like that. Propaganda made by a politician is not worth to be in article like Iran-Israel relationship or we would be adding a lot of propoganda made by Iranian/Israeli politicians in this article. Also Vesuvius Dogg why did you revert with no edit summary and tagged your revert as minor edit? Did you do that accidentally??--SharabSalam (talk) 03:26, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted my edits

Hello, please explain why you reverted both of my edits. Thanks IsraeliIdan (talk) 11:45, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Zvikorn: Because you were editing against a hard-won consensus and we don't need to go around the same circle yet again. "Occupied" is the word used by the great majority of reliable sources, so we use it. Zero^talk 11:48, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Then I am at least adding the part that it was captured from the Jordanians. Leaving occupied.

Question

How is an "Interaction Ban" meant to be applied? Does this mean a prohibition from engaging in discussions with another editor, or does it mean where one editor has edited a Wikipedia page, the banned editor cannot edit there at all? Please explain.Davidbena (talk) 00:52, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't prevent you editing the same pages, but it prevents you from interfering in any way with the other editor's edits on that page, such as reverting them, changing text they inserted, etc.. See WP:IBAN for the official definition. Zero^talk 02:32, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Do you think such a ban will be helpful between me and Huldra?Davidbena (talk) 02:37, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I don't believe it would. Articles would suffer. Zero^talk 02:51, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts

The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised.

Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email
Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak
Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:35, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

Administrator changes

HickoryOughtShirt?4 • RexxS

Necrothesp

Bratsche • Kyle Barbour • Kzollman • Madman

Interface administrator changes

Pharos

Bureaucrat changes

Primefac

CheckUser changes

Reaper Eternal

Guideline and policy news

A request for comment concluded that creating pages in the portal namespace should be restricted to autoconfirmed users.
Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Technical news

XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

Arbitration

In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Miscellaneous

A request for comment is currently open to amend the community sanctions procedure to exclude non XfD or CSD deletions.
A proposal to remove pre-2009 indefinite IP blocks is currently open for discussion.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society

Dear Zero0000,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more.

Best regards, Urhixidur (talk) 15:26, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

About your arbcom statement

I just wanted to correct you on "The real question is of how to assign relative weights to two undeniable historical facts. One is that a large number of Polish civilians died during WWII, and the other is that some Poles collaborated with the Nazis in the genocide of the Jews." This dispute has nothing to do with the fact a, i.e. that " a large number of Polish civilians died during WWII", nobody is disputing that. The issue is how to weight the fact that some Poles helped the Jews while others collaborated and even killed them themselves. Obviously, this controversial (and not just in Poland, variations of this are true in all European countries that were under Nazi influence); the point is that some people in Poland try to exaggerate the rescue and whitewash the collaboration - but also, some others do the reverse, try to exaggerate the collaboration (and related vices like antisemitism) and minimize the rescue. Which leads to the two camps I describe, and various levels of compromise in between, with the major issue that on both extremes we have scholars (media aside) who don't acknowledge there could be a middle ground and that they themselves can be exaggerating/whitewashing something, because they are very much on a crusade to right the wrongs, with the wrongs being either the "cover-up/ignorance about the extent of Polish collaboration", or the "exaggeration of said collaboration and ignorance of the rescue efforts". Hope that helps a bit, and you may want to refactor your statement a bit. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:01, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).

Administrator changes

Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický

CheckUser changes

Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

Technical news

The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.

Miscellaneous

The previously discussed unblocking of IP addresses indefinitely-blocked before 2009 was approved and has taken place.
The 2019 talk pages consultation produced a report for Phase 1 and has entered Phase 2.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:49, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of arbitration

You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 23, 2019, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Antisemitism in Poland/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, – bradv🍁 15:06, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs page: a "call to arms"

Hi! Please do take a look at this [[1]]. If you think of it like I do, maybe you can help mobilise "the usual suspects". This screams for a reaction. Thanks and have a great day, Arminden (talk) 07:58, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested Edit

@Zero0000:, as you know, I am currently serving a topic ban, and wish to update an article that has been remotely construed with the I/P area of conflict. The edit, of course, has absolutely nothing to do with that conflict, so I was wondering if you would be so kind as to add the following edit to the article Jaba', Haifa Subdistrict. The natural place for this edit seems to me to be in the sub-section "Classic era," simply continuing where the last editor left off. The suggested edit is as follows:

Archaeologist Benjamin Mazar, disputing this opinion, thought that Gaba of the Horsemen (Geba) (mentioned by Josephus in The Jewish War 3.3.1) ought to be identified with the ruin Ḫirbet el-Ḥârithîye (now Sha'ar HaAmakim), since in relation to Simonias, it better fits Josephus' description of Gaba / Gibea (Greek: Γάβα) in Vita § 24 being distant from Simonias 60 stadia (about 11 km.), in addition to the fact that, in relation to Besara (Beit Shearim), Gaba / Gibea (Ḫirbet el-Ḥârithîye) stood at a distance of only 20 stadia (about 4 km.) from Besara, also in agreement with Josephus.^[1]^[2] Victor Guérin thought that Sheikh Abreik was to be identified with Gaba of the Horsemen.

Feel free to improve its style, making it easier to comprehend. As always, I appreciate your assistance, and especially your work to further enhance the accuracy of this noble project.

References

^ Mazar (Maisler), B. (1957). Beth She'arim - Report on the Excavations during 1936–40 (in Hebrew). Vol. 1 (The Catacombs I–IV). Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society. p. 19.; HUCA xxiv (1952/3), pp. 75–81; Avi-Yonah, M. (1940). Map of Roman Palestine. London: Oxford University Press. p. 38.
^ Cf. Josephus, Vita § 24

Davidbena (talk) 00:44, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Zero0000. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Doug Weller talk 17:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

Administrator changes

28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam¹ • Flyguy649 • Fram² • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe

¹Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

²Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

Bureaucrat changes

28bytes • WJBscribe • Wizardman

Interface administrator changes

MSGJ • TheDJ

CheckUser changes

Beeblebrox • BU Rob13 • DoRD

Oversight changes

Beeblebrox • BU Rob13 • DoRD • GB fan

Guideline and policy news

A request for comment seeking to alleviate pressures on the request an account (ACC) process proposes either raising the account creation limit for extended confirmed editors or granting the account creator permission on request to new ACC tool users.

In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

The scope of CSD criterion G8 has been tightened such that the only redirects that it now applies to are those which target non-existent pages.
The scope of CSD criterion G14 has been expanded slightly to include orphan "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects that target pages that are not disambiguation pages or pages that perform a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).
A request for comment seeks to determine whether Wikipedia:Office actions should be a policy page or an information page.

Technical news

The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.

Miscellaneous

In February 2019, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) changed its office actions policy to include temporary and project-specific bans. The WMF exercised this new ability for the first time on the English Wikipedia on 10 June 2019 to temporarily ban and desysop Fram. This action has resulted in significant community discussion, a request for arbitration (permalink), and, either directly or indirectly, the resignations of numerous administrators and functionaries. The WMF Board of Trustees is aware of the situation, and discussions continue on a statement and a way forward. The Arbitration Committee has sent an open letter to the WMF Board.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:20, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).

Administrator changes

Johnuniq • Kosack • Valereee

Ad Orientem • Ched • Gadfium • Jonathunder • Nick • Yelyos

Bald Zebra • Beetstra • Doug Bell • Journalist • Ruud Koot • Splash • Voice of Clam

Interface administrator changes

Dinoguy1000

CheckUser changes

RickinBaltimore

Oversight changes

Beeblebrox

RickinBaltimore

Guideline and policy news

Following a request for comment, the page Wikipedia:Office actions has been changed from a policy page to an information page.
A request for comment (permalink) is in progress regarding the administrator inactivity policy.

Arbitration

Editors may now use the template {{Ds/aware}} to indicate that they are aware that discretionary sanctions are in force for a topic area, so it is unnecessary to alert them.

Miscellaneous

Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.
Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:24, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).

Administrator changes

Bradv • Chetsford • Izno

Floquenbeam • Lectonar

DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana

CheckUser changes

Callanecc • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Oversight changes

Callanecc • Fox • HJ Mitchell • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Technical news

Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.

Arbitration

A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2019 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

Miscellaneous

A global request for comment is in progress regarding whether a user group should be created that could modify edit filters across all public Wikimedia wikis.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RE: "some moron"

Probably best to refrain from name calling even when —or rather especially whenever— frustration is high. Regards, El_C 16:31, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Racism in the Palestinian territories

I just saw your revert as I was looking at the editor, and noticed that whoever had added the DS talk page notice hadn't added ECP, so I've done that. But I think the editor needs a warning, not just a revert. Hard to sanction someone who hasn't been warned. Thanks. Damn, wrote this hours ago, didn't get saved! Doug Weller talk 18:28, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Temple of Solomon

Please take a look at the current situation on the article. And the edits made by a user.Mr.User200 (talk) 13:37, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is this valid? I dont know User_talk:Mr.User200#Inappropriate_Canvassing Mr.User200 (talk) 13:06, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr.User200: Generally it is not allowed to solicit support just from people you consider might take your side in a dispute. If you want to leave messages like that on personal talk pages, do it for everyone who has edited the article or its talk page recently. Alternatively, you can write to the article talk page adding a ping for each recent editor. If you want to solicit input from a wider group of editors, you can post to a project, such as Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Israel, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Palestine, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Archaeology or others. Zero^talk 13:30, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information.Mr.User200 (talk) 13:34, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).

Administrator changes

Barkeep49

Beetstra • KillerChihuahua • Kusma

Arcadian • Extraordinary Machine • Xeno

JamesBWatson → JBW

Interface administrator changes

CheckUser changes

Courcelles • SilkTork • Timotheus Canens

Oversight changes

Courcelles • SilkTork • Timotheus Canens

Guideline and policy news

Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.

Technical news

As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.

Arbitration

The 2019 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place October 4th to 10th.
The arbitration case regarding Fram was closed. While there will be a local RfC focus[ing] on how harassment and private complaints should be handled in the future, there is currently a global community consultation on partial and temporary office actions in response to the incident. It will be open until October 30th.

Miscellaneous

The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:55, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case commencing

In August 2019, the Arbitration Committee resolved to open the Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case as a suspended case due to workload considerations. The Committee is now un-suspending and commencing the case.

The primary scope of the case is: Evaluating the clarity and effectiveness of current remedies in the ARBPIA area. More information can be found here.
Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 4/Evidence. The evidence phase will be open until 18 October 2019 (subject to change).
You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel articles 4/Workshop. The workshop phase will be open until 25 October 2019 (subject to change).
For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.
If you do not wish to receive case updates, please remove your name from the notification list.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:09, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi, User:Zero0000. I wanted to ask you, in your capacity as an administrator, what is the proper procedure for an ordinary editor, such as myself, to suggest an edit on one of the Wikipedia guidelines, such as manual of style, or on Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Hebrew)? --Davidbena (talk) 17:24, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidbena: Except for trivial things like typos, it would be a good idea to write suggestions on the talk page first. Check if the issue has been discussed before. You can expect resistance if there is already an agreement or if you propose a change that will invalidate a lot of existing practice. I see some poor writing: "The letter he at the ends of words is not pronounced in Hebrew (in modern Hebrew, even with a mapik), and will be omitted in most cases." This is about how to write a word in English letters, so of course ה is omitted. The sentence should be "The letter he at the ends of words is not pronounced as "h" in Hebrew (in modern Hebrew, even with a mapik), so a final "h" will be omitted in most cases." Cheers. Zero^talk 22:42, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Zero0000. That was helpful. I'll formulate my suggestions and then add them to the relevant Talk-Pages.Davidbena (talk) 23:51, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 4: workshop extended

The workshop phase of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case will be extended to November 1, 2019. All interested editors are invited to submit comments and workshop proposals regarding and arising from the clarity and effectiveness of current remedies in the ARBPIA area. To unsubscribe from future case updates, please remove your name from the notification list. For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:40, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).

Administrator changes

GermanJoe • Girth Summit • Kees08 • Nosebagbear

DESiegel • GB fan • MSGJ • Voice of Clam • WilyD

DeltaQuad • Fang Aili • Pakaran

Bureaucrat changes

DeltaQuad • Pakaran

Interface administrator changes

MSGJ

CheckUser changes

L235 • Mz7 • SQL • ST47

Ivanvector

Oversight changes

L235 • Mz7 • ST47 • Stwalkerster • The Blade of the Northern Lights • Xaosflux

DeltaQuad • DGG • Julia W

Guideline and policy news

An RfC was closed with the consensus that the resysop criteria should be made stricter.

The follow-up RfC to develop that change is now open at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 Resysop Criteria (2).

A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.

Arbitration

Eligible editors may now nominate themselves as candidates for the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections. The self-nomination period will close November 12, with voting running from November 19 through December 2.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:15, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

JIDF

I saw your comment on the talk page. The article also clearly fails WP:SUSTAINED and has for years. The deletion rationale from 2016 was right about that. Basically all RS coverage was from a brief period in 2008. Oh well. ♟♙ (talk) 00:16, 7 November 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) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've got mail

Hello, Zero0000. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.DannyS712 (talk) 12:19, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ARCA Archived

Hi Zero, I wanted to let you know that I have archived your ARCA request here. SQL ^{Query me!} 23:08, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).

Administrator changes

EvergreenFir • ToBeFree

Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂

CheckUser changes

Beeblebrox

Deskana

Interface administrator changes

Guideline and policy news

An RfC on the administrator resysop criteria was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new request for adminship is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally, Bureaucrats are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.
Following a proposal, the edit filter mailing list has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.

Technical news

Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry. A new page, MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry-ip, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. (T219126)

Arbitration

Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous

The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine-Israel articles 4: workshop reopened

Because of the nature of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 arbitration case and the importance of the exact wording of remedies, the Arbitration Committee would like to invite public comment and workshopping on the proposed decision, which will be posted soon. Accordingly, the workshop in this case is re-opened and will remain open until Friday, December 13. To opt out of further announcements, please remove yourself from the notification list. For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:45, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Need Your Help

Hi Zero0000,

Happy New year and wish you a prosperous 2020,

As I see you work on pages about local historical places I dare to pose my question. I used to create pages about some small historical places of my country, Iran, but I had to stop because they were locally and failed notability.This was also true for the articles which existed in Wikipedia:Persian and i translated it into English. I wonder if I can use your advice on how to continue that? Thank you.Alex-h (talk) 13:40, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Alex-h: Hi, can you tell me some examples? I can see them even if they were deleted. Zero^talk 13:52, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Zero0000, it’s very kind of you accepting to help me with my edits. These are the articles I had problem with. Fortunately, none was deleted but all stayed in draft for sometimes.

Minaret Kabir, I had real problem finding sources outside its local circle.

Map of Iran in Afsharid Era. Although it existed in Persian Wikipedia but they put it in AFD, fortunately survived.

Alliance School, Tehran, stayed in draft for one month for not having enough sources.

Alliance School, Kermanshah, Stayed four months in draft.

Xerxes I's inscription at Van, another editor worked on it and improve it.

At last fear of having deleted articles made me to give in. I stopped creating these articles. I hope you can help me. I do appreciate that you are putting your time and efforts on this. Alex-h (talk) 22:31, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mail

Hello, Zero0000. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Onceinawhile (talk) 00:26, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).

Administrator changes

Dreamy Jazz • Newslinger • Rosguill

Deor • Spartaz • Xeno

Angusmclellan • clpo13 • Edgar181 • Matthewedwards • NCurse

CheckUser changes

Bradv • Casliber • David Fuchs • Maxim • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy • Xeno

Oversight changes

Bradv • Casliber • DGG • David Fuchs • Maxim • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy • Xeno

Someguy1221

Guideline and policy news

A request for comment asks whether partial blocks should be enabled on the English Wikipedia. If enabled, this functionality would allow administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces, rather than the entire site.
A proposal asks whether admins who don't use their tools for a significant period of time (e.g. five years) should have the toolset procedurally removed.
Following a successful RfC, a whitelist is now available for users whose redirects will be autopatrolled by a bot, removing them from the new pages patrol queue. Admins can add such users to Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist after a discussion following the guidelines at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist.

Arbitration

The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted rather than reasonably construed.
Following the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Bradv, Casliber, David Fuchs, DGG, KrakatoaKatie, Maxim, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy, Worm That Turned, Xeno.

Miscellaneous

This issue marks three full years of the Admin newsletter. Thanks for reading!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:07, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recuest

Good evening I am a bengali wikipedian and trying to translate Aslo accord article in Bangla. But there is a security issue and I can't copy the html text of this article to translate. Can you send me the copy of full html text in my gmail id? My gmail id is here Sorghum 14:00, 30 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by প্রলয়স্রোত (talk • contribs)

Administrators' newsletter – February 2020

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

Administrator changes

Ergo Sum • Nick Moyes • QEDK • Wugapodes

Dennis Brown

Aude • BrownHairedGirl • CALR • Jengod • John Reaves • J.smith • Kim Dent-Brown • K1Bond007 • MECU • Refdoc • RHaworth

CheckUser changes

Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Interface administrator changes

Guideline and policy news

Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input. No proposed process received consensus.

Technical news

Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [2]

Arbitration

Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.

Miscellaneous

Voting in the 2020 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2020, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2020, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
The English Wikipedia has reached six million articles. Thank you everyone for your contributions!

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:06, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Abel's book

On vol. 2, page 301, there is supposed to be a "Tell esh Shammām" or "Tel esh-Shamam". Can you tell me what is written there about the site?--Bolter21 (talk to me) 18:53, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2020

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

Administrator changes

Money emoji

Athaenara • DeltaQuad

Fishhead64 • Kudpung • Mikaey

Bureaucrat changes

CheckUser changes

Oversight changes

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous

Following the 2020 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: BRPever, Krd, Martin Urbanec, MusikAnimal, Sakretsu, Sotiale, and Tks4Fish. There are a total of seven editors that have been appointed as stewards, the most since 2014.
The 2020 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Ajraddatz and Uzoma Ozurumba; they will serve for one year.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1979–80 Shia uprising in Iraq

Hi, due to your interest in Middle Eastern history, you are welcome to contribute to the newly created 1979–80 Shia uprising in Iraq article.GreyShark (dibra) 12:48, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose changes to articles

Please see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Israel_Palestine_Collaboration#Changes_to_many_pages I would like your opinion. Zarcademan123456 (talk) 02:51, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re canvassing

Hello. I have just seem the message you left on my personal Talk page regarding canvassing. I assume it is referring to the messages I recently left on the Talk pages of the users Shrike and Tritomex. I was not sure whether this was canvassing, and I have also received messages from other editors requesting my input on pages (to address recent edits) or regarding discussions. On the canvassing page, two instances of appropriate notification listed include notifying: "Editors who have made substantial edits to the topic or article" and "Editors who have participated in previous discussions on the same topic (or closely related topics)". .Thus seems to apply to the twi editors I notified. Was the issue perhaps in the way in which I wrote my messages (in which I included the objections I had had with the edits in question (rather than characterizing the issue more neutrally)? If my recent messages were canvassing, what should I now do? Is the appropriate course action to delete the messages, or should I do something else? Thank you. Skllagyook (talk) 13:37, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Linking to crappy articles

Hey Zero,

I just noticed you reverted my edits liking a couple pages to The Stone of Losses. I understand your reasoning, it really is a crappy article, but I'm just trying to de-orphan it. I was hoping that by linking it to higher trafficked (and relevant) articles, it would receive some attention and hopefully provoke an expert on the subject (which I am not) to get it properly researched and sourced. Is this misguided? Mbdfar (talk) 07:04, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mbdfar: I don't think there is a firm rule about this situation. My general approach is to consider the experience of the readers, rather than of the editors. The hope is that a reader who clicks on a "see also" link will come to an article with more reliable information related to the subject, but I don't think that is the case here. I think that even the association of the "stone of the strayers" with the Temple Mount is conjectural, since the primary mention in the Mishna does not say where it is. (My amateur reading is that the story of Honi implies that the stone was not on the mount, see page 398; if they were on the mount already, they wouldn't have to go somewhere else to look at it.) Actually the most efficient way to get action on an article is to list it for deletion; that was done once before but the case was closed prematurely with little benefit to the article. Zero^talk 10:27, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Descendant of refugees, UNHCR vs UNRWA

Can you please point to where in the document that you mentioned on the talk page does it mention the definition of refugees? Zarcademan123456 (talk) 14:41, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zarcademan123456: Section 5.1 is all about families of refugees. The rules are messy and not the same as UNHCR's rules, but it is false in general that refugee status is not passed to descendants. Zero^talk 01:45, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2020

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

Administrator changes

Cabayi • Lee Vilenski

Boing! said Zebedee

Jonny-mt • MarkGallagher • PeaceNT

Money emoji → Moneytrees

Bureaucrat changes

SilkTork • WereSpielChequers

CheckUser changes

NativeForeigner

Oversight changes

Someguy1221

Daniel Case

Guideline and policy news

There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

Technical news

There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.

Arbitration

Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.

Miscellaneous

The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

About PEF survey

I am using the PEF survey for reference in articles about archaeological sites. Is there a place where I can see in what timeframe each of the sheets was studied? I want to write exactly when these places were visited because some of them were for a time small hamlets made of mudbricks and these settlements don't always have a permanent nature.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 13:14, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bolter21: I don't think this information is available in detail. The early pages of volume 1 of the survey have a brief chronological account that might help a little. The maps themselves all say "surveyed and drawn May 1878" which isn't much use. Zero^talk 14:48, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Israel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Transjordan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:35, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020

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

Administrator changes

Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nabulsi_soap&action=history

Oversight changes

HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

Discretionary sanctions have been authorized for all pages and edits related to COVID-19, to be logged at WP:GS/COVID19.
Following a recent discussion on Meta-Wiki, the edit filter maintainer global group has been created.
A request for comment has been proposed to create a new main page editor usergroup.
A request for comment has been proposed to make the bureaucrat activity requirements more strict.

Technical news

The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. You can review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page.
Enterprisey created a script that will show a link to the proper Special:Undelete page when viewing a since-deleted revision, see User:Enterprisey/link-deleted-revs.

Miscellaneous

A request for comment closed with consensus to create a Village Pump-style page for communication with the Wikimedia Foundation.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ain Jalut

I'm guessing I don't have to explain BRD to you. Your bold addition that I reverted and you reinstated is, by your own admission, part of ARBPIA. So, please self revert and follow the usual process. Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 05:03, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Levivich: There was nothing bold about my edit. It was a perfectly normal act of article improvement. This is an article about a place and you claim that it is trivia that there used to be a village there; that's simply nonsense. It was your deletion that was bold (and unjustified). BRD is not a policy and ARBPIA does not mandate discussion before reverted content is reinserted. That rule was removed in the last ARBPIA arbcom case. Zero^talk 05:12, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm speechless that you are saying your addition wasn't the "bold" part of BRD but my reversion was, or that you don't have to follow BRD because it's not a policy. And ARBPIA does not mandate discussion before reverted content is reinserted?? The WP:ONUS policy is what mandates that. It's currently 2-1 opposed to the addition in the talk page thread I started. You're arguing that this content is covered by a DS area while simultaneously ignoring our policies. I ask you a second time to self revert and follow our normal editing procedures. You need consensus before you can re-add the content per WP:ONUS and WP:BRD. Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 05:21, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since you declined to self revert, I've reverted it. Levivich ^{[dubious – discuss]} 14:53, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Let me get this straight: At 03:33, 5 May 2020, you added some disputed content to the article, which was subsequently removed. At 03:46, 5 May 2020‎‎ , you logged this ARBPIA notice to the article's talk page - That notice clearly says "If an edit is reverted by another editor, its original author may not restore it within 24 hours of the revert". Then, at 05:00, 5 May 2020‎ you restored the content that was removed by Levivich, directly violating the restriction that you yourself added to the page, and are now claiming doesn't apply? I think WP:AE should be the next step here. JungerMan Chips Ahoy! (talk) 15:11, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I actually think SPI is the next move, I'll start working on that. nableezy - 23:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nableezy, who do you think is a sock this time? Sir Joseph ^(talk) 23:44, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you watch Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/NoCal100 you can find out for yourself. nableezy - 00:03, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know this beauty?

this beauty.--Bolter21 (talk to me) 11:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Bolter21: Yes, I know it. A large amount of work went into that site. I don't use it much because I have all the maps and more on my computer, but still the search function is useful when I can't find something. Zero^talk 03:21, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I started the Survey Department of Palestine article – it would be a good place to list all the notable series of maps produced during the mandate, and to explain why the 1:20,000 and the 1:100,000 are the most important. Onceinawhile (talk) 08:46, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have also started to organize the maps we have at commons - I have put all the ones I can find at commons:Category:Survey Department of Palestine maps. Pinging @Padres Hana: who was good enough to upload many of these. Onceinawhile (talk) 10:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ein Qiniya

I can’t find the “thank” button but thx for rectifying my oversight here. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ein_Qiniya

Also, since OETA was not set up yet, how would you characterize the type of governance the city was under at that point? Martial law? Zarcademan123456 (talk) 13:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zarcademan123456: Yes, martial law. Zero^talk 13:41, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Difficult edit

Re: Belt and Road

Copyvios: so do I, I take breaches of BLP seriously too. I can also see an editwar that needs to be nipped in the bud.

It appears that we have an editor that intended to point to an article (of dubious use) who used the wrong syntax He was then hammered (breach of AGF) by an editor with an extreme POV. Ignoring the impolite message you sent me, you have the tools to sort this out- can you ammend the edit so a link to the reference remains, and the copyvio is zapped. Can you watch this article, and if necessary put on protection- the talk page also need watching. Looking at the section that is disrespectful to a politician- using your powers can you moderate the language in the H2. Thank you for being so speedy in you action. ClemRutter (talk) 10:20, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask you for opinion?

[3] thanks GizzyCatBella🍁 15:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Antisemitism in Poland: Motion (May 2020)

The following is added as a remedy to the Antisemitism in Poland arbitration case: 7) 500/30 restriction: All IP editors, users with fewer than 500 edits, and users with less than 30 days' tenure are prohibited from editing articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. This prohibition may be enforced preemptively by use of extended confirmed protection (ECP), or by other methods such as reverts, pending changes protection, and appropriate edit filters. Reverts made solely to enforce the 500/30 rule are not considered edit warring.

- Editors who are not eligible to be extended-confirmed may use the Talk: namespace to post constructive comments and make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive. Talk pages where disruption occurs may be managed by the methods mentioned above.
- Standard discretionary sanctions as authorized by the Eastern Europe arbitration case remain in effect for this topic area.

Passed 6 to 0 by motion at 19:57, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

For the arbitration committee, Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 20:28, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2020

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

Administrator changes

CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth

Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

A request for comment asks whether the Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS) should allowed any unblock request or just private appeals.
The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.

Arbitration

A motion was passed to enact a 500/30 restriction on articles related to the history of Jews and antisemitism in Poland during World War II (1933–45), including the Holocaust in Poland. Article talk pages where disruption occurs may also be managed with the stated restriction.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nablusi soap

Just because nationalistic, why not just reword description then? Especially if the sources are good.

I am not trying to promote viewpoint here; I usually try to edit (and love) by “less is more” concept. But again, if sources are good, I believe commentary on sources should be rephrased, rather than altogether omitted Zarcademan123456 (talk) 09:09, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zarcademan123456: This type of discussion should be on the article talk page. The only possible mention of Israelites is in the Hebrew source, as the other sources here don't mention Israelites. I checked. I can't fix text based on a source I can't access, and it can't stay like it is because it says "were used in soap production, known as potash" which is simply false (potash cannot be used as soap). Soap production in the Middle East long predated Israelites anyway, so why is this insertion here at all? I still think it looks like a standard type of nationalistic push. If the ancient history of soap making is to be covered, it should be done in a balanced fashion. Both of the other sources (Abu Rabia and Cohen, which are good and should be cited) are about soap production in Islamic Palestine but the text makes it sound like Israelites are still being discussed. Zero^talk 10:04, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nablusi soap

Would you mind posting your reply to my talk page? For whatever reason I can’t access on you page Zarcademan123456 (talk) 11:36, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(moved to article talk page). Zero^talk 12:05, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Off-hand

can you tell me out what village the OCHA report (Palestinian springs expropriation page) of a Mugharier, near to the Ein Ar Rashah spring, is? Sorry for the bother.Nishidani (talk) 07:19, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nishidani: Al-Mughayyir, Ramallah about 2km SW of the spring. Zero^talk 08:37, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, prof. Indispensably erudite as always.Nishidani (talk) 09:20, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a valid revision?

Hi, Zero0000. In response to your last comment on the Talk:Hebraization of Palestinian place names, and where you made this edit, do you think the following edit (revised) applies to the Hebraization of place names?

The retentention of the Old Hebrew name for Cesarea Philippi, according to Schürer, effectually began in the 4th century, when the name Paneas was once again used.^[1] The names Lod, Beisan, and Sepphoris were preferred by Semitic groups over their Greco-Roman names, viz., Diospolis, Scythopolis and Diocæsarea, respectively.^[2] By the time of the Middle Ages, Hadrian's intention to banish the Jews from Jerusalem and to apply his own name Ælius to the city, and which was done, according to Philostorgius, "that they might not find in the name of the city a pretext for claiming it as their country," had no longer been realised.^[3] (END QUOTE)

As for Philostorgius, can we not attribute a quote to his name, and where there is a connection to our topic matter? Just asking. While the name "Paneas" may actually be a Greek name, it was used by the Hebrews before its name was changed to Cesarea-Philippi.

References

^ Schürer 1891, p. 134 (note 345).
^ Rainey 1978, p. 10.
^ Sozomen & Philostorgius 1855, p. 481 (epitome of book vii, chapt. 11).

Davidbena (talk) 12:57, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It has all the same faults as the original version. So, no, it is not acceptable. Zero^talk 01:41, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2020

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

Administrator changes

Malcolmxl5

John • TheCoffee • Tim!

Creffett → GeneralNotability

DeltaQuad → AmandaNP

CheckUser changes

Bbb23

Interface administrator changes

TonyBallioni

Guideline and policy news

A request for comment is in progress to remove the T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) speedy deletion criterion.

Technical news

Protection templates on mainspace pages are now automatically added by User:MusikBot II (BRFA).

Arbitration

Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community.
The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:26, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

map animation

To editor Onceinawhile: To editor Huldra: I now have scripts which will make things like this automatically given the bounds in either lat/long form or Palestine grid form. To reduce the distraction caused by the animation, it only cycles 5 times (refresh the page to start it again). This map is larger than desirable (15MB). For only two maps, a smooth transition done in css is nicer and smaller but I didn't yet figure out how to wikify it. Zero^talk 14:26, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zero0000, I like it. Some questions:

Would the same script allow for the creation of three separate images all with the same coordinates? That way we could have gifs on some pages and switcher buttons on others – I don’t think we need every page the same.
Could the gifs easily have labels added to them so readers know what they are looking at?
Could we easily add Jacotin into the same
Is this easy for the rest of us to do? If we are going to get this put onto all 400+ depopulated villages and their current Israeli locations, we are going to have to share the burden across a number of regular editors

Onceinawhile (talk) 18:59, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Onceinawhile: To your questions in order: (1) Yes, that's what it does before combining them. (2) Yes, the script could either apply text on the map itself or below it. Of course a human would have to supply the text. (3) Not easily. I rely on wikimedia and POM having tile servers with the same tile system. I'm not aware of a tile server for Jacotin so a lot of manual work would be needed. (4) All the software components are free. If you have linux, you probably have them already. If you have Mac, I can walk you through the installation. Let's not mention that other possibility. Zero^talk 02:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Zero. On (3), the POM guys seemed to suggest they intend to add Jacotin in due course, so presumably they will have to create a tile system for it. But there is no certainty that it will work well, given the number of errors in that map, so I don't think we should wait. On (4) ok great, that would be excellent. A couple of other points:

(5) I am still quite taken by the "overlays", for which I acknowledge your counterpoints. It is possible to add the creation of these to the same script?

(6) I have created a sortable table of all the destroyed villages at Talk:List_of_towns_and_villages_depopulated_during_the_1948_Palestinian_exodus#New_table_for_comment_-_DRAFT. Should allow for checking whether there are missing articles, and allows for contextualization of the most significant localities.

Onceinawhile (talk) 13:41, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(3) The problem is that Jacotin's scale is irregular and the positions of the villages are only rough (and sometimes way off). It can't be overlaid on a modern map without anomalies. Also it is 1:100K so the size of the rectangle that shows a useful amount of detail is much larger than for the 1:20K maps. (4) Tell me by email what computer and OS you have and I'll send instructions and a test script. (5) Yes, the overlay is a png with transparent background and combining it with another image is elementary. Also changing it to blue. So you can tip a bowl of spaghetti onto the Mona Lisa's face if you want. (6) It should involve Khalidi and Huldra. Also, for the purpose of making maps the coordinates would be good (either Lat/Long or Pal grid). Zero^talk 14:12, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zero0000, thanks. I will email you re 4. Re 6, Abu Sitta's work heavily sources Khalidi, Morris and Hadawi / Village Statistics. Onceinawhile (talk) 17:04, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to try to figure out Wikidata, particularly Wikidata:Wikidata:Infobox Tutorial. That way all the village infobox info can go into Wikidata, as can the images and the maps – it can then be automatically pulled from there together with the coordinates. It will make things much less manual as the way we present things here continues to evolve. Onceinawhile (talk) 21:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find it just now, but somewhere there is a recent discussion of problems with displaying stuff from wikidata in infoboxes, due to the lack of control that this project has over the quality of data on that project. In the case of images on Commons, we solve such problems by using a different image or no image, but if wikidata becomes another battleground over Palestinian villages after all the infoboxes in Wikipedia have been modified, it will be a big mess. Zero^talk 03:59, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the links on this. Very fair – it seems a little to early to create reliance on Wikidata. The project has not yet hit “critical mass”, presumably because too much of it requires programming knowledge, thereby discouraging a large proportion of Wikipedia’s editors from involvement over there. Onceinawhile (talk) 10:31, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ARBPIA clarification request

Hi Zero0000, I've closed the clarification request you filed. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 23:25, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine Open Maps

To editor Huldra: To editor Onceinawhile: I've added Palestine Open Maps to the GeoTemplate template (the thing that is activated when you click on coordinates). Try Deir Yassin for example; it will show Palestine Open Maps as well as the Israel map choices. On the other hand, if you try Al-Mansi you will see only the Israeli maps. The reason is the "coordinates" argument of the infobox, which has "type:city_region:IL" for al-Mansi but "type:city_region:PS" for Deir Yassin. The template has the IL section inside the PS section, which is why you see both Palestine and Israel choices for region PS but only Israel choices for region IL. A task worth doing is to change the region to PS for all the depopulated villages. Zero^talk 05:45, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea. I have gone through and made the change with AutoJWB. Onceinawhile (talk) 19:25, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

While doing that I noticed the template Template:GeoGroup which is on all the categories. It can automatically pull all the coordinates of any category. I wish I had noticed it before I spent all the time pulling the coordinates semi-manually a few days ago! Onceinawhile (talk) 19:52, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is brilliant! (I have no idea as to how you fixed that..)

I especially likes the "download" option :) Nice!

My only (small) objection is that I suspect very few(?) readers will find it...it took me years before I even pressed the longitude/latitude numbers ...(Hey, not everyone are as "cartophiles" as you two are! (you, and User:Padres Hana))

In short: it is a treasure trove, but I wonder how many will find it? Is it possible to make reader more aware of it? -somehow give it a greater prominence? (I suspect not, as part of GeoTemplate template? Is there other ways?)

This really deserves greater prominence, Huldra (talk) 20:56, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Huldra: We are planning greater prominence, probably including a direct link on each village page. Zero^talk 02:15, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Exellent! A clear link on each page is what is needed, Huldra (talk) 20:27, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

		The Wizard of Oz Barnstar
		In recognition of Zero's magical achievements in mapping out the disappeared reality of Palestine and its peoples. Nishidunny 07:14, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From me, too! ;) Huldra (talk) 20:27, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I guess all of us bristle a little at awards and compliments. Smacks of flattery, adulation, greasing up. Nothing any of several of the constructive editors in the I/P area rank higher than a big toe compared to the majestic stature your achievement in village articles confers on you, uniquely, Huldra. What a silly sentence, come to think of it. But it is true. I don't like handing out barnstars because I consider that, singularly, they imply an underestimation of other contributors. That shed/said, I'll finish my night cap, and put one on to do some sobering reading offwiki. Best regards to you all. A magnificent collaborative collective achievement.Nishidani (talk) 21:29, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Immediately rushing to exploit my credit rating after some tactical brownnosing

could I call on Your Omniscience to clarify a thing that's threatening to rob me of sleep?

I read the Fawzi al-Qawuqji article today, having time only to fix one thing. But the sentence that he

Was also awarded the German Iron Cross, second class, for his service fighting alongside General Otto von Kreiss' Prussians

stopped me in my tracks. Ever heard of him or a Prussian corps in that area in WW1? One sees this repeated as a meme, verbatim all over the net. Could it be a conflation of the Otto in Otto Liman von Sanders and a distorted memory of von Kress in Friedrich Freiherr Kress von Kressenstein-both key commanders assisting the Ottomans in the Middle east in that period? I'd ask Barry Jones, but I don't have his phone number, and we only met once in Collins Book Store in Little Collins Street in 1967, not enough to intrude again.Nishidani (talk) 22:01, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nishidani, see Laila Parsons (6 February 2017). The Commander: Fawzi al-Qawuqji and the Fight for Arab Independence 1914–1948. Saqi. p. 32. ISBN 978-0-86356-176-4.. She even found a picture of him wearing the medal. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:29, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Never been in doubt about the Iron Cross, he won it at Nabi Samwil and deservedly. Thanks for the link but I did check that following the indication on his page. No mention, as far as I can see of this meme datum Otto von Kreiss. The point was that overall command of the German expedition in WW! in that area was General Otto Liman von Sanders, and it was he who ordered al-Qawuqji to act as an intelligence agent, infiltrating behind British lines and furnish the general staff with field reports. His closest rapport was with a von Leyser. One would expect that to be Ernst von Leyser, lieutenant of the Prussian Army since 1909.Parsons mentions him as a cavalry officer, but in his German bio there is no mention of that chap on the Eastern front. Wiki is crammed with googled stuff that is never cross-checked, as editors google away, fish up and copy and paste the first source that pops up whatever its provenance. Ah well, no time for this. Sorry for the bother.Nishidani (talk) 07:38, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nishidani: I propose that it originates in the 1972 book "O Jerusalem!" by Collins and Lapierre, which has essentially the same wording "fighting alongside the Prussians of General Otto von Kreiss". No source is given. I don't think that's reliable enough so reducing the text to what Parsons has is probably the best option. Zero^talk 08:04, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As you were writing that, I was making my corrective edit to the page. Your suspicion is precisely mine, garnered yesterday when I looked into several sources to backtrack what struck me as the usual meme replication. Thanks again.Nishidani (talk) 08:09, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2020

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

Administrator changes

Red Phoenix

Euryalus • SQL

Jujutacular • Monty845 • Rettetast • Madchester

Oversight changes

GB fan

Keegan • Opabinia regalis • Premeditated Chaos

Guideline and policy news

There is an open request for comment to decide whether to increase the minimum duration a sanction discussion has to remain open (currently 24 hours).
Speedy deletion criterion T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) has been repealed following a request for comment.
Speedy deletion criterion X2 (pages created by the content translation tool) has been repealed following a discussion.
There is a proposal to restrict proposed deletion to confirmed users.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish Virtual Library as a source

I noticed your message to me in Talk:Haifa so I checked the list of unreliable sources and it seems to say that in certain cases exceptions can be made. Direct quote from the list of unreliable sources: "Some exceptions on a case by case basis are possible." It's obviously very partisan in favor of Israel on stuff like it's myths and facts section, but I feel that these concerns are less apt when it comes to simply documenting history of a particular city or town. I think there isn't as much of a problem when citing it in the history section of Haifa so I think a case could be made that we can make an exception this time.--RM (Be my friend) 23:20, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Reenem: There are plenty of unreliable history sources. Two points on JVL: (1) Their hosting of Myths&Facts is proof of their shaky relationship to the truth. (2) The JVL page you are citing draws from Encyclopedia Judaica, including the references at the end which are just copied from EJ. EJ is written by scholars and, even though its history articles understandably focus on Jewish history, it is a reliable source for us. However, the fact that JVL cites EJ doesn't make JVL reliable, since JVL sometimes makes silent modifications of its own. I discovered this in a similar article when I saw a few sentences that I knew to be falsehoods and thought "surely EJ wouldn't have that rubbish"; sure enough, EJ didn't have it. The solution here is rather simple: cite EJ directly. I don't know if you have EJ, but I do and I'll move the citation to EJ after checking it. Regards. Zero^talk 09:10, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When someone repeatedly restores things without source

I hope you don't mind it I'm bringing this here. The talk is starting to deviate farther and farther from the article and I wanted to keep discussion from deviating any further. In Frank Gehry, I took it to NPOV/N relatively early seeing where it was headed. The gossip about reputation being the most recent one he reverted back on, and the one before that was about dual citizenship. They're already accusing I'm FORUMSHOPPING for having it taken to NPOV/N. When someone's been told of the policy, does not ask questions about the policy, and continues to restore unsourced information? Would it have been better to open a BLP/N case after the first time they restored it? Graywalls (talk) 10:00, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Graywalls: Continuously reverting isn't allowed, even if policy is on your side. The best thing is to make a case on the talk page first, for a few days at least. That forces the other side to explain their actions (edit summaries don't count for much). A formal WP:RfC can help, but I wouldn't advise it just for some unsourced text that isn't seriously problematic. After a discussion has failed (from your point of view), you can either walk away or post to a noticeboard. Don't take it too personally, life is too short. Zero^talk 10:41, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

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

Administrator changes

Eddie891

Angela • Jcw69 • Just Chilling • Philg88 • Viajero

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

Following a request for comment, the minimum length for site ban discussions was increased to 72 hours, up from 24.
A request for comment is ongoing to determine whether paid editors must or should use the articles for creation process.
A request for comment is open to resolve inconsistencies between the draftification and alternative to deletion processes.

Arbitration

A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2020 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
An open request for comment asks whether active Arbitrators may serve on the Trust and Safety Case Review Committee or Ombudsman commission.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:57, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

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

Administrator changes

Eddie891

Angela • Jcw69 • Just Chilling • Philg88 • Viajero

CheckUser changes

SQL

Guideline and policy news

Following a request for comment, the minimum length for site ban discussions was increased to 72 hours, up from 24.
A request for comment is ongoing to determine whether paid editors must or should use the articles for creation process.
A request for comment is open to resolve inconsistencies between the draftification and alternative to deletion processes.

Arbitration

A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2020 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
An open request for comment asks whether active Arbitrators may serve on the Trust and Safety Case Review Committee or Ombudsman commission.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:37, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 12

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Beshara Doumani, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palestinian.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:17, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Users with indefinitely protected user talk pages". Thank you. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:19, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2020

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

Administrator changes

Ajpolino • LuK3

Jackmcbarn

Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM

There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

A request for comment found consensus that incubation as an alternative to deletion should generally only be recommended when draftification is appropriate, namely 1) if the result of a deletion discussion is to draftify; or 2) if the article is newly created.

Technical news

The filter log now provides links to view diffs of deleted revisions (phab:T261630).

Arbitration

The 2020 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place from September 27th to October 7th.
Following a request for comment, sitting Committee members may not serve on either the Ombuds Commission or the WMF Case Review Committee. The Arbitration Committee passed a motion implementing those results into their procedures.

Miscellaneous

The Universal Code of Conduct draft is open for community review and comment until October 6th, 2020.
Office actions may now be appealed to the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:44, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just me

Hello. I try to find some neutral help and see you are online. Seams there are 1-2 guys who hate me. They attack me all the time, stalking me, try to change my articles and beeing rude to me. An article I wrote is in one diskussion after next. Since nearly 2 Months now!!! I have no Idea what I done to them. I tryed everything. 1 of them starts with vandalism. Doing very rude edits against WP:Bio and against the sources. Just write ppov in the article and this also in a very rude way. See here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Michel_von_Tell&diff=980267392&oldid=979733489

I dindt say something and tryed to be nice. Just add more sources. But it dosent stop. They come again and again. All the time with other stuff and often in a rude way. I try to be nice, find solutions, try to explain, bring more sources, offer friendship, everything I can. Again and again but it dont stop. :( See here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:BIanca617#Marking_changes_as_'minor'

I not eaven know whats the real problem of this 1-2 guys? Do they hate me, the person from the article, do they hate girls here, are they anti jewish (i read the person of the article is) or is it normal here to be rude? are there many rude people here? I have no Idea:( In wiki rules they say other stuff? I dont know what to do or who I can talk to. Tryed everthing I can but I cant find a good, nice, fair way and also nobody who is helping me? The article is good and well sourced. Every single sentence has 1-2 sources. What else can I do? And I didnt do something rude:( Just did a well sourced article about a record. Much better and much better souced then most other record articles. Look at the normal once Shridhar_Chillal Lee Redmond - Can you help me? I dont want to fight all the time:( Best regards --BIanca617 (talk) 20:08, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Some baklava for you!

Thank you for the citations to Khalidi and the info about the local map for the Kiryat Gat page! NYCJosh (talk) 21:43, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A YouTube video that will interest you

Hi, Zero0000, I have decided to give you a link to a most recent video published on YouTube. When I got to minutes 14:20, it sent goose-bumps all across my body. Please watch from beginning to end. Untold Archaeology of the Temple Mount — Rare Footage, 11 October 2020.Davidbena (talk) 23:18, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks David, I enjoyed the video. In 1993 I was allowed inside both the al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock as part of a tour group. I understand that is now impossible for a non-Muslim. I don't remember if I have your email but if you send me mail I'll give you two relevant papers. One is a Hebrew paper of Dvira (Zweig) about the mosaics, and another is a paper of Yuval Baruch et al. They show photos of some mosaics from an Umayyad palace that look almost identical and therefore they disagree with Dvira about them. You can see Hamilton's photos of the mosaics here. Baruch et al also say that the wooden beams were tested again more recently and dated only to the Byzantine period. Zero^talk 06:20, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I also visited inside the Dome of the Rock back in 1975-1976, as also in the Golden Gate. I wish I had been more studious back-then and knew exactly what to look for.Davidbena (talk) 18:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mail sent to you

Hello, Zero0000. 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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Davidbena (talk) 12:06, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Silwan Map

Hi, I am working on the Silwan article. Looking at the talk discussion, is there any reason why we cannot have your map in the article? Salud.Selfstudier (talk) 11:22, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Selfstudier: No reason that I know of. Zero^talk 12:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Walls of Jerusalem

I'm not arguing about the content, but this isn't under ARBPIA. It's frustrating, but I found out that we can't revert this sort of edit for that reason. Doug Weller talk 15:44, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: I agree that the article as a whole is not under ARBPIA, but ARBPIA now covers ARBPIA-related content of articles and not only whole articles (Item 7). I think that the designation of a place in EJ as Israel vs Palestine is ARBPIA-related content, don't you? On the other hand, you are correct that this was not a valid reason for my revert, since the article doesn't have the required templates—in this case {{ArbCom Arab-Israeli editnotice|relatedcontent=yes}}. I'll add them unless you give a good reason why I shouldn't. Zero^talk 01:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arbpia3 policy. Possible gaming?

See here. Has this issue been covered in the relevant policy debates? Nishidani (talk) 21:08, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2020

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

Administrator changes

John M Wolfson

Bduke • Nilfanion • Philosopher • Rspeer • Yunshui

Interface administrator changes

TonyBallioni

CheckUser changes

EdJohnston • Oshwah • Yamla

Yunshui

Oversight changes

Anarchyte

Yunshui

Guideline and policy news

Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection any article on a beauty pageant, or biography of a person known as a beauty pageant contestant, which has been edited by a sockpuppet account or logged-out sockpuppet, to be logged at WP:GS/PAGEANT.

Technical news

Sysops will once again be able to view the deleted history of JS/CSS pages; this was restricted to interface administrators when that group was introduced.
Twinkle's block module now includes the ability to note the specific case when applying a discretionary sanctions block and/or template.
Sysops will be able to use Special:CreateLocalAccount to create a local account for a global user that is prevented from auto-creation locally (such as by a filter or range block). Administrators that are not sure if such a creation is appropriate should contact a checkuser.

Arbitration

The 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections process has begun. Eligible editors will be able to nominate themselves as candidates from November 8 through November 17. The voting period will run from November 23 through December 6.
The Anti-harassment RfC has concluded with a summary of the feedback provided.

Miscellaneous

A reminder that standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people. (American Politics 2 Arbitration case).

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:53, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not a pogrom?!!

Greetings! I would like to understand why you reverted my addition of 1920 Nebi Musa riots to the CAT Anti-Jewish pogroms by Muslims. Was it not aimed specifically at Jews? Was it not a Pogrom (a violent riot aimed at the massacre or expulsion of an ethnic or religious group)? A speech claiming "If we don't use force against the Zionists and against the Jews, we will never be rid of them" would seem to clearly indicate a desire to expel the Jews and the actions of the mobs over four days certainly seemed to lean towards massacre, as well, with 5 Jews dead, 216 wounded of which 18 critically. Was it not committed by Muslims? I can see no reason why these riots do not meet the criteria for the CAT, so please explain why did you pull the link out? --Eliyahu S ^Talk 20:48, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Eliyahu S: I'm opposed to the use of categories to label events in a way that represents an opinion that historians disagree on. The alleged quotation you give is a fine example: in the article a well-known historian strongly disputes it and reports that Zionist intelligence reports of the time state the opposite. It is fine that both views are represented in the article, but it is not fine to select one of those views for categorisation. Zero^talk 03:39, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gentle ping w.r.t. Talk:Ghabat Kafr Sur#Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 September 2020

Are there any parts of my suggested addition that remain unsourced? --Crash48 (talk) 19:31, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ping again. For your convenience, and to avoid the hassle of putting snippets from Google Books together to read the full fragment being cited, I've posted both referenced pages to https://imgur.com/a/4TMhYwX --Crash48 (talk) 13:16, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Emir Abdullah

Hi. I remember reading a source/content on Wikipedia describing Britain (specifically Samuel, Brunton, Churchill and Deeds) initial opposition to Abdullah’s ambitions in Transjordan when he arrived to Ma’an on 21 November 1920 (a few months before the Cairo conference and the change in policy). Any idea which? I completely forgot. Also @Oncenawhile:, @Huldra:, @Al Ameer son:. Makeandtoss (talk) 23:45, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Establishment of the Emirate of Transjordan (used to be Abdullah's entry into Transjordan) and Sharifian Solution they don't seem to have all those characters in them tho.Selfstudier (talk) 17:50, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

+== ARBPIA4 ==

Hi. Must I have both of 'ArbCom Arab-Israeli editnotice' and 'Arab-Israeli Arbitration Enforcement' for it to be of any use? Selfstudier (talk) 17:51, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Selfstudier: Alas, yes. See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel_articles#Standing sanctions upon primary articles. The catch is you need either page-mover or template-editor power to add the editnotice. You can apply for page-mover at WP:PERM/PM. You can say that you want to add editnotices, which is permitted for any user (not only uninvolved users). If you are successful, to add an editnotice click the page-wide "edit" button (not the first section edit button) and you will see an "editnotice" link. If you are not successful, either (a) ask me, within limits, (b) ask at WP:RPP. Zero^talk 19:46, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That got turned down, I think I will just content myself with placing the enforcement one, that's probably enough to deter most troublemakers. I have enough things to do without going back and forth bothering you or requesting things. Thanks for help.Selfstudier (talk) 00:22, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Selfstudier: You made the mistake of not specifying you wanted to add editnotices, and the admin response confirms that. Zero^talk 01:50, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was clear if I said Israel Palestine, obviously not. Ah well.Selfstudier (talk) 12:45, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Selfstudier: The ability to add editnotices is quite a new feature of the PM flag. Zero^talk 13:24, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment helped, thanks. Primefac deferred to another admin and bradv gave me perms for 3 months.Selfstudier (talk) 08:57, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I added the editnotice at COVID-19 pandemic in the State of Palestine and at West Bank bantustans, if you have a moment just check that I didn't mess it up somehow, please.Selfstudier (talk) 11:24, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Selfstudier: If a substantial part of the first article is not about the I-P conflict, consider using the variant {{ArbCom Arab-Israeli editnotice|relatedcontent=yes}} instead. I didn't check, so I have no opinion. Zero^talk 11:45, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that could be sensible, the previous ups and downs were mostly the usual "Palestine is not a state" /page title kind of thing. The rest, which is mostly factual data summaries, doesn't cause too many problems, just once or twice. I'll change it (and the enforcement) and see how it goes. Thanks.Selfstudier (talk) 11:52, 29 November 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) 01:14, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of Amnesty International

That article exists because the length and level of detail involved would not fit if there was an attempt to incorporate the material into the main Amnesty International article. That's why we have articles such as "Criticism of the BBC" etc. AnonMoos (talk) 22:43, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AnonMoos: Right, but why is it "Criticism" rather than "Praise"? The title sets up the article to be an NPOV violation. I don't think that an article which collects only criticism can possibly satisfy NPOV. If it has to exist, it should have a neutral name like "Commentary on Amnesty International" and collect both positive and negative opinions. Zero^talk 01:00, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The title "Criticism of Amnesty International" is not NPOV, unless you think that Amnesty International is inherently beyond all criticism (by divine right or something). "Amnesty International is a stinky garbage" would be NPOV. The potential problem with such "Criticism" articles is that they present a limited and selective view of their subjects. However, this has been accepted on Wikipedia as a lesser evil in cases where discussing such criticisms at a length and level of detail which is justified by their notability results in an amount of text that can't usefully be incorporated into the main article on the subject. Imagine what the main "BBC" article would be like if it included all of the text from the "Criticism of the BBC" and "BBC controversies" articles! And you could be considered naive for asking where the "Praise" articles are -- praise tends to be kind of inert (does not usually attract much attention), while criticism often generates rebuttals and causes controversy and/or is part of a previously-existing controversy, leading to a cascade of acrimony. You may not like it, but that's kind of what human nature is. However, you could get together with the Torrance Community Dance Group and do an interpretive song-and-dance routine in praise of Amnesty International, if you feel that's necessary. AnonMoos (talk) 06:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AnonMoos: Probably you mean POV, not NPOV. Nowhere did I say that criticism was inappropriate, nor did I say that we should have a "Praise" article. Your example "BBC controversies" actually illustrates my point and is quite similar to my suggestion "Commentary on Amnesty International". "Controversies" suggests a two-way exchange of views, whereas "Criticism" suggests only one-way negative views, a clear and obvious violation of the NPOV policy. What the point of your last sentence is, I have no idea, but I'll assume you are not trying to be offensive. Zero^talk 08:43, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't you ever heard the song "Praise You" by Fatboy Slim? It was number 1 in several territories, and number 1 on the dance music charts in several others. Since the 1990s, I haven't listened to much radio except NPR (and in recent years not even NPR), but I've still heard it, and seen the music video...

Consider that I said "NPOV violation", then -- but it's quite ridiculous and absurd to claim that the title "Criticism of Amnesty International" is itself an NPOV violation (unless, of course, you feel that Amnesty International is intrinsically beyond all criticism). We have an article "Commentary on Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid", but that won't get rid of all "Criticism" articles, since "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid" is a book (not an organization)... AnonMoos (talk)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2020

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

Administrator changes

Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020

Interface administrator changes

Izno

Guideline and policy news

There is a request for comment in progress to either remove T3 (duplicated and hardcoded instances) as a speedy deletion criterion or eliminate its seven-day waiting period.

Technical news

Voting for proposals in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey, which determines what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year, will take place from 8 December through 21 December. In particular, there are sections regarding administrators and anti-harassment.

Arbitration

Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 7 December 2020 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merger

A while ago you proposed merging Dhimmitude to Bat Ye'or at Wikipedia:No_original_research/Noticeboard/Archive_43#Dhimmitude. I agreed to it and so did @Nishidani: and @Warshy: and there was no disagreement. What is the way to do this? Is it to follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Merging#Proposing_a_merger?VR _talk 21:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation that may be of interest to you

Hello Zero,

This user's socketpuppet investigation may be of interest to you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Infinity_Knight , with a CU check confirming same geolocation. This user had reverted one of your edits on the Khairallah Talfah article, then subsequently reverted edits later under a brand new Wikipedia account and then under an IP address. Since you're an administrator that has edited on some of the same articles as the user under SPI, please take a look if you have a chance. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saucysalsa30 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – January 2021

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

Administrator changes

Hammersoft

Andres • Brion VIBBER • Rkitko • Thatcher

CheckUser changes

Barkeep49 • BDD • CaptainEek • Primefac

Oversight changes

Barkeep49 • BDD • CaptainEek

Joe Roe

Guideline and policy news

Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.

Technical news

You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.

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)[reply]

Jerusalem

I tried to delete/merge the "Reunification" article and got nowhere. Maybe I need to come at this a different way altogether. The 67 annex (de facto at a minimum, de jure for all practical purposes according to most authoritative sources annexed "Jordanian East Jerusalem" (this part one could arguably describe as "reunification") and a chunk of the WB (this part is a straight up annex). Neither part is accepted internationally as legal (no change to Jerusalem and occupied WB (including East Jerusalem) resolutions.) Then, a la Jordan case, we have a missing article, Israeli annexation of East Jerusalem (Annexation of East Jerusalem is currently a redirect to Jerusalem Law which is wrong afaics but I have not sources to verify that as yet) where East Jerusalem has today's meaning of both annexed parts (compare Jordanian annexation of the West Bank and West Bank.) Such an article has foundational sourcing, is clearly notable and fixes up misapprehensions/lacunae in the existing Jerusalem articles (reunification, Jerusalem law and Jerusalem day as well as to a lesser extent East Jerusalem articles). Do you think an article like that has merit? An aside, what is your understanding of the term "Arab Jerusalem"? Selfstudier (talk) 12:28, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2021

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

Administrator changes

Hog Farm

Mattflaschen • Nandesuka • Savidan • Wangi

CheckUser changes

Berean Hunter • Xeno

Oversight changes

Someguy1221 • Xeno

Arbitration

The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people, replacing the 1932 cutoff.

Miscellaneous

Voting in the 2021 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2021, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2021, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
Wikipedia has now been around for 20 years, and recently saw its billionth edit!

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

B'Tselem

Hi Zero - I hope things are OK. I am making an attempt to rationalise some of the piles of books in the back room and realise I have 60-70 B'Tselem reports. I am minded to list them on the B'Tselem page but I have a memory that there used to be something similar but it seems to have gone. Can you remember if this is ground that has already been trampled on? Will I just get told off if I have a go at it? All the best.Padres Hana (talk) 21:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Padres Hana: I don't think it would be accepted. It isn't usual to give such long lists of publications on the pages of organizations. Consider Amnesty International for example. A possibility would be a project subpage similar to WP:WikiProject Palestine/Books. Does B'Tselem publish a list of their reports? If so an external link would be appropriate. Zero^talk 07:59, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - it makes sense + great link! Padres Hana (talk) 12:54, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2021

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

Administrator changes

TJMSmith

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

Interface administrator changes

AmandaNP

Guideline and policy news

A request for comment is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a 2019 RfC in favor of creating one such a policy.
A request for comment is in progress to remove F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a, which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
A request for comment seeks to grant page movers the delete-redirect userright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. The full proposal is at Wikipedia:Page mover/delete-redirect.
A request for comment asks if sysops may place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions?
There is a discussion in progress concerning automatic protection of each day's featured article with Pending Changes protection.

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

By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people. Sanctions issued under GamerGate are now considered Gender and sexuality sanctions.
The Kurds and Kurdistan case was closed, authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed.

Miscellaneous

Following the 2021 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AmandaNP, Operator873, Stanglavine, Teles, and Wiki13.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:15, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2021

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

Administrator changes

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

A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.

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

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

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

Administrator changes

Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. Consensus was found in a previous RfC for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus.

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

The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2021

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

Administrator changes

Enchanter • Carlossuarez46

Interface administrator changes

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. Consensus was found in a previous RfC for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus.

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

The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edit notices

Hi, Is it] really such a problem having this perm? I could understand if I was misusing it but I haven't been.Selfstudier (talk) 10:18, 20 May 2021 (UTC) Thank you for that.Selfstudier (talk) 13:44, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ARCA

Do you have a view on this? I thought it would be just the same as the last time around but seems not.Selfstudier (talk) 14:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Here you wrote that you removed information per consensus on the talk page. In fact there is no consensus, we just started the discussion on the talk page. Could you revert it until the consensus is reached? Alaexis_¿question? 07:29, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Alaexis: Per WP:ONUS it is your responsibility to obtain a consensus for including material in an article. If you believe that no consensus has been reached, that just proves that ONUS applies to you. WP:NOCONSENSUS does not, as you apparently believe, refer to a state of there not being a consensus. It refers to a "no consensus" state, which is the stable consequence of an attempt at consensus. Zero^talk 08:02, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question about the 500/30 restriction

Hi, I had a question you might know the answer to. The 500/30 restriction that has been in place for the Israel-Palestine TA covers comments by brand new accounts made at RfCs, right? This has been my understanding but I'm not all that familiar with this topic area. Volunteer Marek 13:13, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Volunteer Marek: Correct, such new users can comment on talk pages but cannot participate in "other internal project discussions such as AfDs, WikiProjects, RfCs, noticeboard discussions" nor in formal "requested move"s. Zero^talk 14:29, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2021

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

Administrator changes

Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless

Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)

Guideline and policy news

Consensus was reached to deprecate Wikipedia:Editor assistance.
Following a Request for Comment the Book namespace was deprecated.

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

After a Clarification request, the Arbitration Committee modified Remedy 5 of the Antisemitism in Poland case. This means sourcing expectations are a discretionary sanction instead of being present on all articles. It also details using the talk page or the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to discuss disputed sources.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

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

Administrator changes

Trialpears

AGK • Eliz81 • Mulad • ThaddeusB • Vianello • Who

Lacrimosus → Ikuzaf

Interface administrator changes

CheckUser changes

AGK • DGG

Oversighter changes

AGK

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

The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.

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

Copyright question

If I take this UN map and add the names per this one would that be legit? Selfstudier (talk) 10:09, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Selfstudier: I'm not an expert on such questions, but I believe it is ok. UN maps are generally in the public domain, see here (which is the tag to use). Manually adding place names doesn't change that. Zero^talk 11:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict...please fill out my survey?

Hello :) I am writing my MA dissertation on Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. My dissertation will look at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article.

For more information, you can check out my meta-wiki research page or my user page, where I will be posting my findings when I am done.

I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out this quick survey before 8 August 2021.

Participation in this survey is entirely voluntary and anonymous. There are no foreseeable risks nor benefits to you associated with this project.

Thanks so much,

Sarah Sanbar

Sarabnas ^{I'm researching Wikipedia} _Questions? 21:16, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Filastin

I vaguely recall you having an interest in this newspaper. Is this of any use? Selfstudier (talk) 09:53, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Selfstudier: Yes, thanks. Beska has done some excellent work on the late Ottoman period. Zero^talk 12:44, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weird story

Hey. I thought you might find this of interest. Ynet reports (link) that yesterday night, two drunk Israeli women accidentally ended up lost (drunkenly) in the Al-Am'ari refugee camp, a camp which Ynet describes as being one of the most dangerous in the West Bank, which even Palestinian Authority forces are wary of entering.

Anyway, rescued by Palestinian Authority forces and handed over to the IDF. They've been criminally charged for unauthorized entry into Area A and for violating a standing Aluf directive.

Regards, El_C 14:49, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The subtitle says that they've had difficulties speaking Hebrew, but I think they meant Arabic. Also, correction: the piece did not say that they've been charged, but that they're expected to be charged, which seems likely in light of their fabrication of there having been a 3rd Israeli woman still in the camp, for which much Palestinian and Israeli manpower was devoted to finding. El_C 16:06, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@El C: Thanks, interesting story. I'm suspicious about the "drunk" claim; more likely they just got lost, which is easy to do. Zero^talk 04:01, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno, according to multiple Palestinian witnesses they were super-hammered. To that: looks like I made a mistake about Ynet conflating Hebrew with Arabic, since the caption for this image reads: "the women were wandering drunk and were unable to communicate even in Hebrew." Lastly, fabricating a 3rd woman seems like a drunken light bulb moment... El_C 05:54, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

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

Administrator changes

BusterD

Kees08 • Nickshanks • Protonk • Schissel • Ultraexactzz • Wknight94

CheckUser changes

Oversighter changes

ST47

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

Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions.

Miscellaneous

You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:19, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Slur "Silly"

Hello, I didn't enjoy the interaction. Please refrain from messaging me in general. If you see a remark I make on a talkpage, you do not have to feel obliged to give conter-criticism of the criticism itself, rather choose to address it in general without asking me to personally respond to you. I don't see the point, and I respond solely because of the provocation, not from interest in the discussion. It's quiet unpleasant and useless.

I don't like the use of the slur "Silly".

Goodbye --Vanlister (talk) 11:44, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, don't I deserve my own personal message instead of a copy-paste of what you left on two other talk pages? Zero^talk 11:56, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No --Vanlister (talk) 14:18, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Really!? Not even correction of the spelling mistakes? ← ZScarpia 18:22, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's something we could consider --Vanlister (talk) 11:26, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Progress? El_C 12:15, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

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

Administrator changes

Jake Wartenberg

Emperor • Viridian Bovary

Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.

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

A request for comment is in progress to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. Comments and new proposals are welcome.

Miscellaneous

The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

North Africa - administrator input required

Hi Zero, I've been beginning to weigh in on articles on food and other things in the Middle East, and I've noticed that the region is particularly oddly divided/classified on the platform. Some of these problems are clearly years in the making, such as the locking of the Wikiprojects to the UN's geoscheme and the use of the totally unnatural phrase 'Western Asia' to refer to the Middle East. But today, one particular issue has grasped my attention, and it pertains to North Africa. Everything gets fantastically messy here, with Maghreb, Middle East, Northwestern Africa and Northeastern Africa all overlapping, but on the specific note of North Africa, a seemlingly unresolved question that has lingered for decades is whether to include Sudan. This has been discussed extensively on the talk page, in various forms, including in relation to the independence of South Sudan, but not firmly resolved. However, as I have noted in a comment, the issue is actually fairly simple. ONLY the UN Statistics Division, which is locked to the UN geoscheme, includes Sudan, while the African Union, World Bank and Encylopedia Britannica sources (and so on) exclude it. Even in the article, there is little mention of Sudan on the page beyond the UN definition. I personally think Sudan should go, in line with most of the sources, geopolitical definitions such as Mena and based on cultural context. Without Sudan, North Africa is a convenient grouping of Maghreb + Egypt + enclaves + Maghrebi culturally influenced Atlantic islands. With Sudan, it is all of that plus an awkwardly placed Sahel state. Anyway, I thought it could really do with the eye of an experienced editor and administrator with an interest in the Middle East to rule on it. I'd be grateful for your input. Best regards, Iskandar 323 (talk) 12:51, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Iskandar 323: Administrators don't decide content issues. If there are problems of behavior, as opposed to content, take them to WP:ANI where multiple administrators will look at it. For your content dispute, the best way to stop it going on forever is to start an WP:RFC. Make sure the topic is stated in a neutral fashion (just listing the options is one way). When the RfC is over, everyone has to abide by the outcome. That implies you might not get your preference, but that's Wikipedia. Zero^talk 13:03, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your ref edit to Yitzchak Ginsburgh

You added an unlinked reference to: Herb Keinon (28 March 1996). "Ginsburgh's detention overturned". The Jerusalem Post. p. 22. As far as I can see, the March 1996 edition of the Jerusalem Post seems only to have 16 pages. Be good! 238-Gdn (talk) 21:20, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@238-Gdn: I don't have easy access to page images from 1996 but only to an article collection via Proquest. For that day they have 84 articles, some labeled "Daily Edition" and some labeled "Magazine Edition". So there were at least two editions that day (Friday), perhaps that explains it. This article says "Daily Edition". I only have a url that includes my account number and pass-key for the paywall, so I can't post it. The page number is unimportant so it could go if you like. Zero^talk 02:07, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Omnibus

Hi, Does it practically change anything as far as Arbpia goes? Selfstudier (talk) 12:44, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Selfstudier: I don't think so. Zero^talk 14:21, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. El_C 12:17, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Abbas' ultimatum at the UN yesterday

Thanks for the clarification — always helps to read the actual UN address in question.¯\_(ツ)_/¯ RE: WaPo's (or AP's Joseph Krauss, rather) final paragraph: Abbas has made veiled threats before, and is unlikely to follow through with the kind of drastic political decision that would spell the end of the PA — what's your take? Regards, El_C 12:11, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@El C: The fact that he has blocked PA elections for years indicates that relinquishing power is not something he is likely to consider. Officially un-recognizing Israel will just help along the nobody-to-speak-to pretext that Israel uses for not speaking to anyone. The only thing that's plausible is an ICC bid, but he's scared that European countries won't support him. Successive Israeli governments have been telling their constituents for many years that there isn't going to be a Palestinian state but the world pretends not to hear. Abbas doesn't have any real options. Cheers. Zero^talk 13:53, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was taught early to follow the money trail behind all the hot air. All those bozos in Ramallah are unlikely to leap off the gravy train for a matter of principle. That would cause digestive problems and overburden the small number of oesophagal specialists who handle the neurology of famine. They'd risk ending up like the Palestinians they pretend to represent, wheras policing them for the only states that matter, the US and Israel, is a sinecure with regular foreign junkets attached at the endless cycle of Potemkin village roadmap theatricals. Nishidani (talk) 14:15, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Along with Biden, old age may be a factor in Abbas' potentially diminishing mental faculties. I presume Marwan Barghouti is the likely successor if and/or when Abbas' old age catches up with him...? Leading the Palestinian National Authority from an Israeli prison would definitely be high on the surrealism scale! Also, I think you meant ICJ — I made the same (ICC) mistake (diff), so... symmetry! Anyway, I guess the ultimate ultimatum would have been for Abbas to say: we're just gonna UDI it in one year and let the chips fall where they may. Thanks again! El_C 14:18, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nishidani: Sinecure — I learned a new word! El_C 14:20, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sumtimes I fink dat's why me prose iz eyether red or ignawed, i.e. fa dropping, like farther's pants on weddin nite, lexical succedanea sumwot too kwikly in me tolutiloquent pitterpatter.:)Nishidani (talk) 15:39, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@El C: Haaretz reported it as ICC, and the slip is understandable since the PA has threatened to take Israel there on charges of war crimes. But ICJ is what it says in his speech and the context makes it clear that ICJ is what he meant. He would win a case at the ICJ since the relevant international law is crystal clear but it would be little more than a show since Israel would ignore it like they ignored the ICJ advisory opinion against the "wall". Contrary to what he claimed in his speech, ICJ rulings are only binding if the parties agree in advance to be bound by them, and Israel is not that stupid. Zero^talk 15:44, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ICJ/ICC. I hope we've all read this closely, i.e., no illusions. Nishidani (talk) 17:19, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Leaving aside the binding question, the most straightforward (and arguably better) way to refer to the ICJ is to ask the UNGA to do it.Selfstudier (talk) 17:20, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Zero, the point is that there's only one UN organ with teeth, the Security Council. The best Abbas can hope to get from the ICJ is a Seal of Approval. That's why I'm saying, if he's gonna ultimatum, UDI or it didn't happen. El_C 19:50, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Serves him right for refusing to endorse the US's historic function of providing Israel with a Steal of Approval.Nishidani (talk) 20:39, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I saw another article by a competent journalist which reports it as ICC. I listened to the speech here (about point 22:55), which is an English simultaneous translation that differs in choice of words from the text version so I assume it is independent. Both say International Court of Justice. I'm not able to understand the original Arabic so I didn't try to find it. Zero^talk 01:48, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

JIDF

Hi, I saw your comment at the JIDF talk page. The last AfD was inconclusive and I tend to agree with the main argument to delete there about sustained coverage. I'm a little nervous to send it back though, because it seems like a politically-charged topic. OrgoneBox (talk) 15:54, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cats problem

Hi, could you please have a word with @TerraCyprus: re his recent editing of categories in the IP area. Thanks.Selfstudier (talk) 13:36, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not to worry, all in hand.Selfstudier (talk) 21:22, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

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

Administrator changes

Blablubbs

Alvestrand • Black Falcon • Deathphoenix • Dppowell • Mark Arsten • JGHowes (deceased)

Oversighter changes

Mkdw

Interface administrator changes

Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, extended confirmed protection may be used preemptively on certain high-risk templates.
Following a discussion at the Village Pump, there is consensus to treat discord logs the same as IRC logs. This means that discord logs will be oversighted if posted onwiki.

Technical news

DiscussionTools has superseded Enterprisey's reply-link script. Editors may switch using the "Discussion tools" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features.

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) 17:05, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2021

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

Administrator changes

Clpo13

Brian0918 • JDoorjam • Karanacs • MrDarcy • Mindspillage

Interface administrator changes

CheckUser changes

Dreamy Jazz • Ferret • GeneralNotability • Girth Summit • RoySmith

Oversight changes

Dreamy Jazz • LuK3

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

Toolhub is a catalogue of tools which can be used on Wikimedia wikis. It is at https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/.

Arbitration

GeneralNotability, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections. Ivanvector and John M Wolfson are reserve commissioners.
Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves to stand in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections from 07 November 2021 until 16 November 2021.

Miscellaneous

The 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of five new CheckUsers and two new Oversighters.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tsk

Diff This person cannot take a hint (re this) Selfstudier (talk) 12:23, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:01, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unsubstantiated allegations against David Collier

You're now the 2nd editor to accuse David Collier of "outing" or "doxxing" wikipedia editors. diff

As of yet, neither of you has provided a reference to substantiate that accusations.

Can you please do so?

-- Bob drobbs (talk) 06:09, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bob drobbs: Of course I won't. That would be contributing to the doxxing. Outing is considered a serious offence that often leads to indefinite blocks. Linking to an outing site is the same as writing the same information on Wikipedia and will be treated with the same seriousness. Zero^talk 06:21, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. But there are a couple of issues with that.

It seems to be at least leaning toward a BLP violation, which apply in talk pages and comments, if you're accusing someone of nefarious actions without being able or willing to substantiate those claims with RS. Though there indeed might be shades of gray difference when you have spoken about the website, and the other user spoke about the person.

And I can't imagine how you can imply that there will be any sort of repercussions for linking to this site, if you can't reference any consensus, rulings, RS, etc. Do you expect me to just take your word that he has done what you say? -- Bob drobbs (talk) 06:49, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. I found the link. I absolutely do not support that and condemn any doxxing. -- Bob drobbs (talk) 07:01, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lol; and then you start an article about one of the worst doxxers out there? Do you really expect anyone to believe you? Do you take us all for morons? Huldra (talk) 22:01, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Huldra: Are you trying to be intentionally combative and start a fight? -- Bob drobbs (talk) 22:39, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, @Bob drobbs:; you started the fight by starting an article about a well-known doxxer; you might end the fight by asking for a deletion of the article, Huldra (talk) 22:43, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Huldra: I created an article in good faith based on a belief that Collier was sufficiently notable and I still stand by that idea. Now please apologize, or at least agree to end what you see as a battle, or else I'll take this to arbitration. -- Bob drobbs (talk) 22:49, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bob drobbs: So you will ask for the article to be deleted, then? Huldra (talk) 22:51, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

At first sight there is a catch-22: how to just justify an assertion that an external actor is engaging in doxxing without linking to the doxxing and thereby participating in it. But this is not the case: evidence about external actors can be sent in confidence to the Wikimedia Trust and Safety Committee, who can evaluate it and take action against Wikipedia editors or not at their discretion. There is no requirement to justify the assertion in public on Wikipedia. Zero^talk 01:23, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair. But you've alluded to some sort of disciplinary action if a user posts a link to his site, which will probably happen at some point if his page survives deletion. Can you reference any sort of consensus or ruling where that's been stated? Surely that doesn't need to be hidden. - Bob drobbs (talk) 01:58, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Most cases of disciplinary action due to doxxing are carried out confidentially, so the limits of what the T&S Committee will consider acceptable are not easy to know. I strongly suspect that the Committee will consider that explaining how to find doxxing information is exactly the same offence as repeating the doxxing information here. Zero^talk 06:04, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2021

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

Administrator changes

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

Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee Elections is open until 23:59, 06 December 2021 (UTC).
The already authorized standard discretionary sanctions for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), broadly construed, have been made permanent.

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

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. 20:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

SWU

Can you do anything about these two? 5 edits and no others since 23 February & 10 edits and no others since 5 May all for the same thing, pointless repetitive requests to remove the description right wing for StandWithUs, WP:NOTHERE. Selfstudier (talk) 19:35, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Those are the same. I don't think it is worth pursuing as it will just come back with a new name. Better to keep the article in good shape and ignore the nagging. Zero^talk 00:07, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A token of thanks

Hi Zero0000! 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 ~~~~~

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

Administrators' newsletter – January 2022

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

Administrator changes

Amalthea • Ihcoyc (deceased) • Kateshortforbob • Kirill Lokshin • Rifleman 82 • Ryan Norton • Wrp103

Interface administrator changes

Mr. Stradivarius

CheckUser changes

Cabayi • Donald Albury • Enterprisey • Izno • Wugapodes

Opabinia regalis

Casliber • David Fuchs • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy

Oversighter changes

Cabayi • Donald Albury • Enterprisey • Izno • Wugapodes

Opabinia regalis

Casliber • David Fuchs • Newyorkbrad • SoWhy

Guideline and policy news

Following consensus at the 2021 RfA review, the autopatrolled user right has been removed from the administrators user group; admins can grant themselves the autopatrolled permission if they wish to remain autopatrolled.

Additionally, consensus for proposal 6C of the 2021 RfA review has led to the creation of an administrative action review process. The purpose of this process will be to review individual administrator actions and individual actions taken by users holding advanced permissions.

Arbitration

Following the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Cabayi, Donald Albury, Enterprisey, Izno, Opabinia regalis, Worm That Turned, Wugapodes.

Miscellaneous

The functionaries email list (functionaries-enlists.wikimedia.org) will no longer accept incoming emails apart from those sent by list members and WMF staff. Private concerns, apart from those requiring oversight, should be directly sent to the Arbitration Committee.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How we will see unregistered users

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Template test

{{subst:alert|a-i|2={{paragraph}}In particular, please note that 30 days tenure and 500 edits are required before you can edit article content and formal community processes such as [[RfC]]s and noticeboard discussions related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. This does not apply to informal discussion on article talk pages.}}

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

In particular, please note that 30 days tenure and 500 edits are required before you can edit article content and formal community processes such as RfCs and noticeboard discussions related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. This does not apply to informal discussion on article talk pages.

That'll do nicely, anything after the 2=, right? Selfstudier (talk) 08:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Selfstudier:, Shrike. Right. Is the text satisfactory? I can make a template for this, such as {{ARBPIAalert}}. Zero^talk 10:36, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's handy to be able to insert any text or even leave it blank so it's the same as existing, depending the situation.Selfstudier (talk) 13:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should we ask arbcom aproval? Shrike (talk) 18:05, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Shrike: You have a point. Stuff inside the colored box looks like official rulings and even though we try to make it accurate we can't really speak for Arbcom. Suppose we just emphasise where to look; I don't think that needs permission.

{{subst:alert | a-i | 2={{paragraph}}In particular, please note that the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Palestine-Israel articles|Arab-Israeli conflict rulings]] include restrictions on editors without 30 days tenure and 500 edits.}}

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in the Arab–Israeli conflict. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

In particular, please note that the Arab-Israeli conflict rulings include restrictions on editors without 30 days tenure and 500 edits.

One thing that has come up a few times with newer editors is that they come across some protected pages that they cannot edit and then assume if they can edit, it is allowed. I suppose we can't cover all eventualities but you can sort of see how this one might happen. If going back to Arbcom is a problem, then let's just have a text outside the blue box that makes things clear. I am quite happy to use anything you think works.Selfstudier (talk) 12:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hum

Gamed? Selfstudier (talk) 08:55, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A large fraction of those edits were reverted. Needs watching. Zero^talk 10:54, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edits signed as "Minor"

Hello Zero0000, thank you for the note. I will make myself aware if edits deserve to be categorised as minor or trivial, or else. Thanks for sensitising me! Best wishes Ulf Heinsohn (talk) 21:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

JStor citations

Hi, I was curious about your comment on the RSN that JStor cites CounterPunch over 1000 times. Do you mind if I ask how you can search citations on JStor, rather than mentions of the word "counterpunch"? Thanks! BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:37, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Idk how Zero0000 does it but you can use the advanced search Selfstudier (talk) 16:45, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to do that but couldn't see a way to limit the search to citations, which would be an incredibly useful tool, especially for sources such as CounterPunch where the title is also a not uncommonly used ordinary word (e.g. the first hit is a book about boxing). It's possible to search with "counterpunch.com" or "counterpunch.org" but that gives a very small number of hits. BobFromBrockley (talk) 17:39, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A basic search on "www.counterpunch.org" threw up 504 results. But some might not do the www or just say Counterpunch and so on.Selfstudier (talk) 18:14, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The search as phrase gave only 13 results[4] Shrike (talk) 18:45, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.jstor.org/action/doBasicSearch?Query=%22www.counterpunch.org%22&so=rel -> 504 results (I haven't looked at them). Selfstudier (talk) 18:53, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And more for "in counterpunch" -counterpunch.org. nableezy - 19:35, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many citations of CounterPunch do not give a url. They give a date, or just the month. That is reasonable since urls decay. So restricting searches to www.counterpunch.org is not correct. A search for (("www.counterpunch.org") OR ("counterpunch.org") OR ("CounterPunch")) gives 1,413 hits. Obviously I didn't look at them all, but I looked at a random sample to see how many were using "CounterPunch" for something other than a citation and judged it was less than 1/4 of the total. Apparently I underestimated those, especially references to boxing. Now I did it more systematically. I looked at every 25th hit and counted how many were mentions of CounterPunch. I got 34 out of 55 with 2 uncertain. So that gives the estimate 873 of articles which reference CounterPunch. As well as the statistical error, there are two additional issues: (1) Some mentions of CounterPunch are not really citations, (2) Many of the articles that cite CounterPunch do so multiple times. Clearly these work in opposite directions if one wants to count citations. So I looked at the full text of the first hit on pages 5,10,...,50 which showed a mention of CP and found that 8 of them had actual citations rather than other sorts of mentions, and the total number of citations was 10. In summary, my best estimate is that 700 articles cite CounterPunch a total of 870 times. I'll edit RSN. Zero^talk 01:14, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Zero0000; that's amazingly thorough! (I was hoping to discover a cool shortcut to find citations on JStor :( BobFromBrockley (talk) 16:32, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – February 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2022).

Administrator changes

AustralianRupert • Cimon Avaro • Euryalus • Jehochman • Nunh-huh

28bytes

Bureaucrat changes

28bytes

Interface administrator changes

Evad37 • Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

The Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines have been published for consideration. Voting to ratify this guideline is planned to take place 7 March to 21 March. Comments can be made on the talk page.

Technical news

The user group oversight will be renamed suppress in around 3 weeks. This will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. The change is being made for technical reasons. You can comment in Phabricator if you have objections.
The Reply Tool feature, which is a part of Discussion Tools, will be opt-out for everyone logged in or logged out starting 7 February 2022. Editors wishing to comment on this can do so in the relevant Village Pump discussion.

Arbitration

Community input is requested on several motions aimed at addressing discretionary sanctions that are no longer needed or overly broad.
The Arbitration Committee has published a generalised comment regarding successful appeals of sanctions that it can review (such as checkuser blocks).
A motion related to the Antisemitism in Poland case was passed following a declined case request.

Miscellaneous

Voting in the 2022 Steward elections will begin on 07 February 2022, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2022, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
Voting in the 2022 Community Wishlist Survey is open until 11 February 2022.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question concerning my topic ban

Hi, Zero0000. I don't want to be caught offending again, nor trespassing my imposed topic ban in the Israel/Palestine area of conflict, otherwise known as the ARPBIA, until such time that I am able to submit an appeal asking to rescind my topic ban, with a reassured commitment to good editing on Wikipedia, and with full compliance to Wikipedia's policies. Meanwhile, my question to you is this: Can I still make edits on pages that do not carry the ARPBIA tag, and am careful not to mention anything politically or ideologically connected to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? For example, mentioning the names of flora that grow in Palestine? Please advise.Davidbena (talk) 13:43, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidbena You should ask your banning admin Shrike (talk) 14:39, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidbena: David, Shrike's method is the safest approach. In general you should interpret "politically or ideologically connected" very broadly. Writing about flora should be fine, but when you describe the distribution of a species you have to avoid incidental political statements (write "Golan Heights", not "Israeli Golan Heights", etc). I notice that lots of red links can be found by following items in Category:Flora of Palestine (region). Zero^talk 01:06, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have already asked him and I'll be careful. Thanks.Davidbena (talk) 17:13, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talmud

About the Talmud and Jerusalem Talmud articles, I would like to inform you that the term "palestinian" should not be used there. As you said "..a very common alternative name even in modern scholarship and there is no reason to censor it" it is used for political reasons, and not historic ones. Only recently some researchers started using it. Moreover, the term "Jewish Palestinian Aramaic" is a complete Joke, it was never used and it is still not in use. Someone added it in order to alienate this language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by עצם בלתי מזוהה (talk • contribs) 02:37, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@עצם בלתי מזוהה: You don't know what you are talking about. Everything you wrote here is false. See the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia regarding Palestinian Talmud and Jewish Palestinian Aramaic. Search for each phrase (also for "Palestinian Jewish Aramaic") at Google Scholar to see recent scholarly sources that use them. Zero^talk 04:02, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewed Work A Dictionary of Jewish Palestinian Aramaic of the Byzantine Period (Dictionaries of Talmud, Midrash and Targum II) by Michael Sokoloff. Doug Weller talk 15:49, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the "Jewish Aramic" is much more common [5] Shrike (talk) 16:03, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

O for God's sake, Shrike. It is absolutely normal in historical scholarship to refer to a Palestinian Talmud, for the simple reason that the adjective distinguished one from the other (Bavli_Babylonian Talmud) by referring to the respective geographic areas where they were composed. This hang-up about using the word 'Palestine/Palestinian' as if it meant the PLO/PA/or Palestinian people is tiresome, yielding to the politicization of language, to an obsession with establishing a national modern 'politically correct' set of denominators over history, which, even in Jewish traditional scholarship, suffered no such crisis of nerves or sense of illegitimacy. Nishidani (talk) 16:12, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I never implied anything that you say. We only talking about WP:COMMON in Wikipedia sense. Shrike (talk) 17:39, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Before commenting on a page's thread, you really should read it first, and not react to one word in it without looking at context, as you have here in ignoring that the point and Zero's reply concerned an alternative name, whose relevance is mentioned in the policy you mentioned WP:COMMON. So you are waving a policy flag without reading it, to respond to a thread without reading it. Doubly bad practice.Nishidani (talk) 17:48, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Shrike: You are correct that "Jewish Aramaic" is common. However, there were subtle differences between the version spoken in Babylonia and the version spoken in Palestine, and this is reflected in the language of the Talmuds. Experts for whom the difference is significant use designations like "Palestinian Jewish Aramaic" and "Babylonian Jewish Aramaic". Zero^talk 00:31, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifaction Shrike (talk) 06:22, 10 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For your 20th birthday!

Enjoy! Huldra (talk) 22:39, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, dear friend. Zero^talk 02:18, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – March 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2022).

Administrator changes

Modussiccandi

BOZ • Brookie (deceased) • Jackmcbarn • Jamesday • Jonathunder • Master of Puppets • Saravask

CheckUser changes

Oversighter changes

Guideline and policy news

A RfC is open to change the wording of revision deletion criterion 1 to remove the sentence relating to non-infringing contributions.
A RfC is open to discuss prohibiting draftification of articles over 90 days old.

Technical news

The deployment of the reply tool as an opt-out feature, as announced in last month's newsletter, has been delayed to 7 March. Feedback and comments are being welcomed at Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project. (T296645)
Special:Nuke will now allow the selection of standard deletion reasons to be used when mass-deleting pages. This was a Community Wishlist Survey request from 2022. (T25020)
The ability to undelete the talk page when undeleting a page using Special:Undelete or the API will be added soon. This change was requested in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey. (T295389)

Arbitration

Several unused discretionary sanctions and article probation remedies have been rescinded. This follows the community feedback from the 2021 Discretionary Sanctions review.

Miscellaneous

The 2022 appointees for the Ombuds commission are Érico, Faendalimas, Galahad, Infinite0694, Mykola7, Olugold, Udehb and Zabe as regular members and Ameisenigel and JJMC89 as advisory members.
Following the 2022 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AntiCompositeNumber, BRPever, Hasley, TheresNoTime, and Vermont.
The 2022 Community Wishlist Survey results have been published alongside the ranking of prioritized proposals.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:47, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

excessive coords precision

Your edit: (reduce excessive coords precision) I am curious what are the guidelines for coordinate precision? is there a relevant wikipage? Loew Galitz (talk) 17:05, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Loew Galitz: There are guidelines at WP:OPCOORD. For locations in Israel, 1 second is about 21 meters east-west and 26 meters north-south. A typical small kibbutz is 400-1000 meters in diameter, which is around 20-40 seconds. Giving two digits after the decimal point for seconds suggests that the location is known to within about 20 centimeters, which is meaningless. I'm rounding to the nearest second, which is a movement of 16 meters in the worst case and usually less, at most 1/20 of the size of the location. I hope that makes sense. Zero^talk 22:42, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I understood your purpose, I just wanted the wikipedia rulebook. Thank you for the explanation. Loew Galitz (talk) 01:33, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Where should discussion about Hate site Haaretz go?

Haaretz incitement against Haredim (who are not serving in the IDF)

Prior to the massacre in Bnei Brack today Mar 29.22, Nehemia Shtrasler wrote in the hate site "paper" Haaretz (which for some reason is considered a RS here on wiki) against the ultra orthodox Haredim that (overwhelmingly refused and ) don't serve in the army and proposed, asked what would have happened if instead of soldiers, there were Yeshiva students at the terror scenes. MK Moshe Abutbul: Hopefully now Nehemiah Shtrasler has calmed down [6] Say Nehemiah Sthrasler, an attack with four dead in the ultra-Orthodox city of Bnei Brak is enough or do we need something in Mea Shearim as well?[7] [8] [9][10][11]Truth3v3r (talk) 03:53, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't go anywhere. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a social media site. Try Twitter. Zero^talk 05:04, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Crater (Aden)

You may note my latest editing of the article. I suppose the colonel’s memoirs might be classed as Original Research, as might my own contributions, as I was actually present that night as a rifleman in ‘A’ Company, though not positioned close enough to hear the pipes. But in the second half of the tour, I was billeted beside the Pipes and Drums, and I never heard any questioning of the story, either then or later, working as a reporter in Edinburgh. Valetude (talk) 10:52, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Valetude. If the book mentions the story about the surrender, it would be ok to mention it as the opinion of the author or as the belief of the British soldiers. But I don't think that stating it as a plain fact is good unless the rebels themselves confirmed it. Only the rebels really knew why they surrendered. Cheers. Zero^talk 12:35, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I find it odd that we're having to prove that there was no formal surrender. The other side would hardly be wanting to prove there was one. Why is the surrender story being treated as sacred? Where did it come from? Where are the cites?

I can offer you this much:

The Times, January 9, 2010: ‘We regret driving out the British,’ say Aden’s former rebels.

One of them wrote a letter saying “Under the British we had peace. The Yemeni fighters were ignorant. I hope the British come back.” Another said “People didn’t know any better. It was an emotional response born out of Arab nationalism and Nasserite revolutionary feelings.” Valetude (talk) 13:22, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Valetude You misunderstood, sorry. I'm only referring to the story that they surrendered because of the pipes playing. Zero^talk 13:31, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They didn't surrender. There were no prisoners. They simply melted away, and restricted their activities to occasional small arms fire, apart from one attempt at another mutiny, which Mitch faced down through sheer force of character. Valetude (talk) 13:45, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Hebron

Wait some more on this? Ping some people? Just do it? Selfstudier (talk) 11:40, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – April 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2022).

Administrator changes

Firefly • Sdrqaz

Ad Orientem

Geschichte • Ryan Postlethwaite • Sabine's Sunbird • Wassupwestcoast

Interface administrator changes

Guideline and policy news

An RfC is open proposing a change to the minimum activity requirements for administrators.

Technical news

Access to Special:RevisionDelete has been expanded to include users who have the deletelogentry and deletedhistory 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)

Arbitration

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.

Miscellaneous

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.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2022).

Administrator changes

Colin M

David.Monniaux • Fribbler • Grue • Kpjas • West.andrew.g

CheckUser changes

Ks0stm

Oversighter changes

Ks0stm

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, a change has been made to the administrators inactivity policy. Under the new policy, if an administrator has not made at least 100 edits over a period of 5 years they may be desysopped for inactivity.
Following a discussion on the bureaucrat's noticeboard, a change has been made to the bureaucrats inactivity policy.

Technical news

The ability to undelete the associated talk page when undeleting a page has been added. This was the 11th wish of the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey.
A public status system for WMF wikis has been created. It is located at https://www.wikimediastatus.net/ and is hosted separately to WMF wikis so in the case of an outage it will remain viewable.

Arbitration

Remedy 2 of the St Christopher case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to place a ban on single-purpose accounts who were disruptively editing on the article St Christopher Iba Mar Diop College of Medicine or related pages from those pages.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:35, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Band name

Whoops, looks like I accidentally posted the name of my underground downtempo/grindcore band. Thanks for catching that! 😬 Drsmoo (talk) 03:00, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Mandatory Palestin

I disagree with your edit there -- it was a flag legally decreed FOR USE AT SEA. It had no particular status ON LAND. AnonMoos (talk) 22:27, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AnonMoos: I know that; I'm just about to add the actual legislation. It was a maritime ensign with no purpose on land at all (unless government port installations flew it). What does it mean to say that a maritime ensign was "not embraced", except if it was not embraced at sea? And where is the source? At the moment this is a useless sentence and it can't stay. Zero^talk 03:08, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As stated in the article, it was the only Palestine-specific flag not restricted to official government use, so there was nothing preventing its use on land by anyone who wanted to do so (though without official status), if there had been any enthusiasm for it -- but there was no enthusiasm for it. Assertions in the lead section don't require separate sourcing if they follow from what's below. AnonMoos (talk) 03:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AnonMoos: Where is this claim sourced anywhere in the article? Why is it significant if nobody used a maritime ensign on land? Why should they? Zero^talk 03:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AnonMoos: Note that authority from the "Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty" was required for the maritime ensign to be used on ships. I can't prove it, but I'll bet that use for any other purpose was illegal. Zero^talk 06:24, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ARCA

Hi Zero! I think you might mean "DS-aware" instead of "DS-alert" toward the end of your statement. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:26, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – June 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2022).

Administrator changes

Tamzin

Barek • Darkwind • Geometry guy • ProcseeBot • RoyBoy • Sean Whitton • Valereee • Visorstuff • WAvegetarian

Sn0wflake → VersedFenrir

CheckUser changes

Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

Several areas of improvement collated from community member votes have been identified in the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement guidelines. The areas of improvement have been sent back for review and you are invited to provide input on these areas.

Technical news

Administrators using the mobile web interface can now access Special:Block directly from user pages. (T307341)
The IP Info feature has been deployed to all wikis as a Beta Feature. Any autoconfirmed user may enable the feature using the "IP info" checkbox under Preferences → Beta features. Autoconfirmed users will be able to access basic information about an IP address that includes the country and connection method. Those with advanced privileges (admin, bureaucrat, checkuser) will have access to extra information that includes the Internet Service Provider and more specific location.

Arbitration

Remedy 2 of the Rachel Marsden case has been rescinded following a motion. The remedy previously authorised administrators to delete or reduce to a stub, together with their talk pages, articles related to Rachel Marsden when they violate Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy.
An arbitration case regarding WikiProject Tropical Cyclones has been closed.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – July 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2022).

Administrator changes

AA • Gwalla • Ioeth • Laurascudder • Moriori (deceased) • Nat • Rfl

Drilnoth → AFigureOfBlue

Bureaucrat changes

Lee Vilenski

Interface administrator changes

Nihiltres

Technical news

user_global_editcount is a new variable that can be used in abuse filters to avoid affecting globally active users. (T130439)

Arbitration

An arbitration case regarding conduct in deletion-related editing has been opened.

Miscellaneous

The New Pages Patrol queue has around 10,000 articles to be reviewed. As all administrators have the patrol right, please consider helping out. The queue is here. For further information on the state of the project, see the latest NPP newsletter.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:29, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Refugees

Idk if you saw it already, "The Challenge of Categories: UNRWA and the Definition of a Palestine Refugee" (Ilana Feldman 2012) is of any use? Selfstudier (talk) 10:40, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Selfstudier: Thanks. It is more interesting as a summary of how UNRWA operated in the early days. Quite a lot of mythology is refuted there. Zero^talk 11:35, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hamat Gader, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Samra.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Periods

Afore I go getting myself into trouble, is there a consensus anywhere about the use of the terms "First Temple period" and "Second Temple period". I know what they mean now but I would have thought your average reader wouldn't really understand them. They might not understand "Persian period" or "late Roman" either but still, more chance with those than the other? Selfstudier (talk) 17:58, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The first temple period is actually the iron age and pre-Persian - with the Persians came Cyrus the Great, who returned the exiled Babylonian Judaeans to Jerusalem and rebuilt the temple, the second temple, which overlaps both Persian and Roman (Herodian) periods. Iron age seems the obvious way to go with the former - second depends a little on the framing. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:48, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine "First Temple period" and "Second Temple period" might be rather popular terms in biblical archaeology though, and have some source weight. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:55, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To editors Iskandar323 and Selfstudier: I don't know if there is wiki-consensus about this. I don't remember one but my memory for such things is bad. Certainly these phrases are very common in sources. I think that "First Temple period" is sometimes used even by people who are not sure of the reality of the first temple; to them it just means the time period during which the first temple traditionally existed. In Wikipedia, I think that we should specify time periods using explicit numbered centuries, with the possible exception of when we are writing about something to do with the temple. It is more informative to general readers and there is no rule that we have to slavishly follow the wording of sources when the paraphrase doesn't involve OR. Zero^talk 07:16, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree with specific dates in the text where possible, I was thinking more of section heads.

If we take the Jerusalem article then there is a Jerusalem#Overview of Jerusalem's historical periods divied up by who was in charge and then continues Prehistory, Bronze and Iron, Biblical (is this a period?), Classical antiquity etc.

There are also some timeline articles, Timeline of ancient history etc.

If you were writing an article about some place and its history (assuming it had a long history) how would you divide the time frame? Selfstudier (talk) 09:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are several confusions on that page. Perhaps worst is the over-extension of the classical period, which hands over to the early middle ages/medieval period in the 4th century CE, as noted, in fact, on the History of Jerusalem during the Middle Ages page, not with the Muslim conquests, as the current timeline somewhat implies. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:56, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Picking this up on your talk :) Selfstudier (talk) 21:04, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – August 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2022).

Administrator changes

Valereee

Anthony Appleyard (deceased) • Capitalistroadster • Samsara

Guideline and policy news

An RfC has been closed with consensus to add javascript that will show edit notices for editors editing via a mobile device. This only works for users using a mobile browser, so iOS app editors will still not be able to see edit notices.
An RfC has been closed with the consensus that train stations are not inherently notable.

Technical news

The Wikimania 2022 Hackathon will take place virtually from 11 August to 14 August.
Administrators will now see links on user pages for "Change block" and "Unblock user" instead of just "Block user" if the user is already blocked. (T308570)

Arbitration

The arbitration case request Geschichte has been automatically closed after a 3 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

You can vote for candidates in the 2022 Board of Trustees elections from 16 August to 30 August. Two community elected seats are up for election.
Wikimania 2022 is taking place virtually from 11 August to 14 August. The schedule for wikimania is listed here. There are also a number of in-person events associated with Wikimania around the world.
Tech tip: When revision-deleting on desktop, hold ⇧ Shift between clicking two checkboxes to select every box in that range.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hrm

Diff. Selfstudier (talk) 07:29, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nvm, resolved. Selfstudier (talk) 10:52, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

West Bank rule

Hey, I'm looking for the Wikipedia rule that says we should use West Bank instead of Judea and Samaria, do you have a link to it? Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 07:04, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Supreme Deliciousness: WP:WESTBANK Selfstudier (talk) 08:01, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pringle - Aqsa Mosque

Hey Zero0000. I've begun working on al-Aqsa Mosque again. Pringle's The Churches of the Crusader Kingdom ... Vol 3 presents a pretty comprehensive and detailed history of the building, but there are several pages which I am unable to access by GBooks preview. Do you happen to have full access to this source? The pages I am looking for are 417, 421, 424, 427, 430-431 and 433. @Huldra: Same message. For some reason I remember, or misremember, that Zero or yourself had access to this book. If not, my apologies. --Al Ameer (talk) 16:17, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Al Ameer son; I have a physical copy of the book. Unfortunately my scanner doesn't work, so I will have to wait until Monday to go to the library to scan it -and send it to you- (I believe I have your email-address?) -unless Zero beats me to it. Cheers, Huldra (talk) 22:34, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To editor Al Ameer son: I can email you the book but I don't think I have your address. If you send me mail, I'll reply with the book. Huldra, your copy is on its way. Zero^talk 03:05, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both! And glad I do not have to trouble Huldra now ;) Will be emailing you shortly Zero. —Al Ameer (talk) 20:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – September 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2022).

Administrator changes

DanCherek • DatGuy • Femke • Z1720

Aldux • Graham Beards • Nyttend

Interface administrator changes

Mr. Stradivarius

Guideline and policy news

A discussion is open to define a process by which Vector 2022 can be made the default for all users.
An RfC is open to gain consensus on whether Fox News is reliable for science and politics.

Technical news

The impact report on the effects of disabling IP editing on the Persian (Farsi) Wikipedia has been released.
The WMF is looking into making a Private Incident Reporting System (PIRS) system to improve the reporting of harmful incidents through easier and safer reporting. You can leave comments on the talk page by answering the questions provided. Users who have faced harmful situations are also invited to join a PIRS interview to share the experience. To sign up please email Madalina Ana.

Arbitration

An arbitration case regarding Conduct in deletion-related editing has been closed. The Arbitration Committee passed a remedy as part of the final decision to create a request for comment (RfC) on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion (AfD).
The arbitration case request Jonathunder has been automatically closed after a 6 month suspension of the case.

Miscellaneous

The new pages patrol (NPP) team has prepared an appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) for assistance with addressing Page Curation bugs and requested features. You are encouraged to read the open letter before it is sent, and if you support it, consider signing it. It is not a discussion, just a signature will suffice.
Voting for candidates for the Wikimedia Board of Trustees is open until 6 September.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:13, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – October 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2022).

Administrator changes

ScottishFinnishRadish

Staxringold

Ahoerstemeier (deceased) • Ched

Interface administrator changes

Cyberpower678

CheckUser changes

GorillaWarfare

Guideline and policy news

Following an RfC, consensus was found that if the rationale for a block depends on information that is not available to all administrators, that information should be sent to the Arbitration Committee, a checkuser or an oversighter for action (as applicable, per ArbCom's recent updated guidance) instead of the administrator making the block.
Following an RfC, consensus has been found that, in the context of politics and science, the reliability of FoxNews.com is unclear and that additional considerations apply to its use.
Community comment on the revised Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines is requested until 8 October.

Technical news

The Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to Preferences → Gadgets and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.

Arbitration

Remedy 8.1 of the Muhammad images case will be rescinded 1 November following a motion.
A modification to the deletion RfC remedy in the Conduct in deletion-related editing case has been made to reaffirm the independence of the RfC and allow the moderators to split the RfC in two.
The second phase of the 2021-22 Discretionary Sanctions Review closes 3 October.

Miscellaneous

An administrator's account was recently compromised. Administrators are encouraged to check that their passwords are secure, and reminded that ArbCom reserves the right to not restore adminship in cases of poor account security. You can also use two-factor authentication (2FA) to provide an extra level of security.
Self-nominations for the electoral commission for the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections open 2 October and close 8 October.
You are invited to comment on candidates in the 2022 CUOS appointments process.
An RfC is open to discuss whether to make Vector 2022 the default skin on desktop.
Tech tip: You can do a fuzzy search of all deleted page titles at Special:Undelete.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:43, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – November 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2022).

Administrator changes

- Isabelle Belato
- Whpq

Interface administrator changes

CheckUser changes

Oversight changes

DGG

Guideline and policy news

The article creation at scale RfC opened on 3 October and will be open until at least 2 November.
An RfC is open to discuss having open requests for adminship automatically placed on hold after the seven-day period has elapsed, pending closure or other action by a bureaucrat.

Arbitration

Eligible editors are invited to self-nominate themselves from 13 November 2022 until 22 November 2022 to stand in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections.
The arbitration case request titled Athaenara has been resolved by motion.
The arbitration case Reversal and reinstatement of Athaenara's block has entered the proposed decision stage.
AmandaNP, Mz7 and Cyberpower678 have been appointed to the Electoral Commission for the 2022 Arbitration Committee Elections. Xaosflux and Dr vulpes are reserve commissioners.

Miscellaneous

The 2022 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process has concluded with the appointment of two new CheckUsers.
You can add yourself to the centralised page listing time zones of administrators.
Tech tip: Wikimarkup in a block summary is parsed in the notice that the blockee sees. You can use templates with custom options to specify situations like {{rangeblock|create=yes}} or {{uw-ublock|contains profanity}}.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thetorah.com

See RSN, seems that it is.[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Is thetorah.com a reliable source] Doug Weller talk 08:42, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: I dissented there. Also, the editor in question has been copying material from thetorah.com together with the citation given there. For example, two things at Avaris: "abandonment during the 19th dynasty", and "Even after the fall of the Hyksos dynasty, Avaris had one of the largest populations of Semitic-Asiatics in Egypt". Both are sourced to this excavation report but I can't find either of them there. Another excavation report also doesn't have them, I think. Zero^talk 12:29, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've warned him about adding material not in cited sources. I think we need to continue the warnings. Doug Weller talk 15:12, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration of the Jews memorandum

In January this year you uploaded an image of a memorandum published in the August 26 1840 issue of The Times headed RESTORATION OF THE JEWS. The file's title is RestorationJewsTimes1840. Perhaps you or I could change that to Restoration of the Jews Memorandum 1840 (assuming the year is accurate) or RESTORATION OF THE JEWS MEMORANDUM 1840. Mcljlm (talk) 03:57, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcljlm: What difference does it make what the file name is? Zero^talk 07:34, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Zero: All titles should be accurate especially since they're likely to be used elsewhere. In this case "the" isn't insignificant. There doesn't appear to be any reason for there not to be spaces between the words or before the year. Mcljlm (talk) 22:58, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – December 2022

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).

Administrator changes

Interface administrator changes

CheckUser changes

Oversight changes