User talk:Firefly
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Administrators' newsletter – May 2024[edit]
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2024).
Guideline and policy news
- Phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship review has concluded. Several proposals have passed outright and will proceed to implementation, including creating a discussion-only period (3b) and administrator elections (13) on a trial basis. Other successful proposals, such as creating a reminder of civility norms (2), will undergo further refinement in Phase II. Proposals passed on a trial basis will be discussed in Phase II, after their trials conclude. Further details on specific proposals can be found in the full report.
Technical news
- Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531
Arbitration
- The arbitration case Conflict of interest management has been closed.
Miscellaneous
- This may be a good time to reach out to potential nominees to ask if they would consider an RfA.
- A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 15,000 articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!
- Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 9 May 2024. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!
Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C[edit]
- You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.
Dear Wikimedian,
You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.
This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.
The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.
Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.
On behalf of the UCoC project team,
RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
RFA2024 update: phase I concluded, phase II begins[edit]
Hi there! Phase I of the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review has concluded, with several impactful changes gaining community consensus and proceeding to various stages of implementation. Some proposals will be implemented in full outright; others will be discussed at phase II before being implemented; and still others will proceed on a trial basis before being brought to phase II. The following proposals have gained consensus:
- Proposals 2 and 9b (phase II discussion): Add a reminder of civility norms at RfA and Require links for claims of specific policy violations
- Proposal 3b (in trial): Make the first two days discussion-only
- Proposal 13 (in trial): Admin elections
- Proposal 14 (implemented): Suffrage requirements
- Proposals 16 and 16c (phase II discussion): Allow the community to initiate recall RfAs and Community recall process based on dewiki
- Proposal 17 (phase II discussion): Have named Admins/crats to monitor infractions
- Proposal 24 (phase II discussion): Provide better mentoring for becoming an admin and the RfA process
- Proposal 25 (implemented): Require nominees to be extended confirmed
See the project page for a full list of proposals and their outcomes. A huge thank-you to everyone who has participated so far :) looking forward to seeing lots of hard work become a reality in phase II. theleekycauldron (talk), via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Request for wording change[edit]
Hi, is this from one of your bots? Is there any way I could convince you to change "bogus file options" to something a little less derogatory, like "file option errors" or some other wording of your choice? There's a backstory to the request but tl;dr somebody says it's ok to use "bogus" in an edit summary because it's in this report (and maybe whatever tool he is using). He's pretty wrong about that, but is not a native English speaker and apparently doesn't believe wiktionary.
Changing the software labels is a fairly trivial ask as far as I know, and it would rescue us both from a conversation that neither he nor I is enjoying. I would appreciate it if that happened. Elinruby (talk) 22:25, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- "Bogus (file options)" **IS** the official Wikipedia term for unrecognized file parameters within WP:EIS file syntax. Details on the Bogus file options can be found here. Using the word "bogus" is in no way, shape, or form, any sort of commentary on you or your edits. To my knowledge, Firefly is not the originator of the term and is not in control of the term. Jonesey95 simply mentioned Firefly's report as it is a far easier to use than Wikipedia's report layout of the same information seen here, and was not saying Firefly had any control over the term. Zinnober9 (talk) 23:54, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Zinnober9: thank you for the answer. Where then would be the place to take this request? the ticket system? The fact that the wording is "official" doesn't make it any less insulting. The word should not appear in an edit summary. If the wording comes from the WMF, then the WMF needs to be asked to comply with its own CoC. I realize that Jonesey95 feels blindsided, and I have disengaged, but he and I previously had a run-in about "fixing" things within minutes of an error occurring. And sure, yes, there was an error. I failed to type "alt=" and did not immediately remove the original caption when I decided I liked the wording intended for the alt better than the caption. This is probably a fringe case in that the vast majority of lint errors are probably on abandoned articles. I wonder though if we could make this easier for the Joneseys of Wikipedia by not including errors that are less than x amount of time old in the report. Let's take this off firefly's page if he has nothing to do with it, as he seems to have enough to worry about already. Please make any response to either my talk page or, if it's more convenient, ping me from elsewhere. Elinruby (talk) 00:25, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
FireflyBot bug?[edit]
In this edit, FireflyBot warned a user that their sandbox would soon be eligible for deletion under WP:G13. This is obviously false, right? jlwoodwa (talk) 03:47, 21 May 2024 (UTC)