| Revision as of 01:20, 13 August 2024 editAndrzejbanas (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers123,653 edits →Question: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:05, 13 August 2024 edit undoGoneIn60 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers32,326 edits →Question: Re: AndrzejbanasNext edit → | ||
| Line 153: | Line 153: | ||
| :::{{tps}} Felt the need to jump in here. While there are a number of examples we could look at, {{u|Andrzejbanas}}, let's use the one you just provided. You had an opportunity to course correct in this discussion and move closer to compromise, right up to the point you dropped ]: "{{tq|You are really obsessed with cast and crew.}}" Any goodwill you should have been attempting to salvage or earn back from your peers at that article gets sabotaged with comments like that, which places others back into a defensive posture. DisneyMetalhead had just left you some positive feedback, showing a willingness to compromise and move forward, yet you proceeded in typical fashion with a narrow, self-serving focus. A great opportunity to mend relations was lost here; many editors with your experience would have instantly recognized this as the perfect time to pause and simply "thank" DMh for the kind feedback.{{pb}}Littered throughout these talk page discussions are reminders from you directed at other editors to remain ] and to ], like you did recently ] and ], yet you aren't heeding your own advice when you call out another user's ''obsession'', or especially when you launch a . Have you read ]? You speak about all this animosity and unfair judgement directed at you, but the underlying issue is failing to take accountability for your own actions and behavior. --] (]) 21:45, 12 August 2024 (UTC) | :::{{tps}} Felt the need to jump in here. While there are a number of examples we could look at, {{u|Andrzejbanas}}, let's use the one you just provided. You had an opportunity to course correct in this discussion and move closer to compromise, right up to the point you dropped ]: "{{tq|You are really obsessed with cast and crew.}}" Any goodwill you should have been attempting to salvage or earn back from your peers at that article gets sabotaged with comments like that, which places others back into a defensive posture. DisneyMetalhead had just left you some positive feedback, showing a willingness to compromise and move forward, yet you proceeded in typical fashion with a narrow, self-serving focus. A great opportunity to mend relations was lost here; many editors with your experience would have instantly recognized this as the perfect time to pause and simply "thank" DMh for the kind feedback.{{pb}}Littered throughout these talk page discussions are reminders from you directed at other editors to remain ] and to ], like you did recently ] and ], yet you aren't heeding your own advice when you call out another user's ''obsession'', or especially when you launch a . Have you read ]? You speak about all this animosity and unfair judgement directed at you, but the underlying issue is failing to take accountability for your own actions and behavior. --] (]) 21:45, 12 August 2024 (UTC) | ||
| :::::: {{ping|GoneIn60}}, I'm going to acknowledge that I have been full of contradictions. Thanks for pointing this out. I've also posted several times (and if you are were traipsing through my comments, I said that lately, I've felt like I've been watched like a hawk for people trying to catch me slipping up." Thank you for confirming that is exactly what is happening. Not sure what the end goal of this is, but yes, it might have made my etiquette slip. If you want to discuss with me on what I can do and how you could help. Fantastic. Would love to hear it. Perhaps on my talk page or yours. You made good points and I'll be an adult and respect them. As stated, I feel like I've got hawk eyes on me for any edits as of late. Please discuss with me on my talk page, as I'm feeling a bit ]. I've already for past incidents, which is you know, following ]. I'd suggest you follow the previous rule, and I really don't think it would be respectful to just link to a bunch of diff pages as I would really like to move on and try to edit. Cheers. ] (]) 01:20, 13 August 2024 (UTC) | :::::: {{ping|GoneIn60}}, I'm going to acknowledge that I have been full of contradictions. Thanks for pointing this out. I've also posted several times (and if you are were traipsing through my comments, I said that lately, I've felt like I've been watched like a hawk for people trying to catch me slipping up." Thank you for confirming that is exactly what is happening. Not sure what the end goal of this is, but yes, it might have made my etiquette slip. If you want to discuss with me on what I can do and how you could help. Fantastic. Would love to hear it. Perhaps on my talk page or yours. You made good points and I'll be an adult and respect them. As stated, I feel like I've got hawk eyes on me for any edits as of late. Please discuss with me on my talk page, as I'm feeling a bit ]. I've already for past incidents, which is you know, following ]. I'd suggest you follow the previous rule, and I really don't think it would be respectful to just link to a bunch of diff pages as I would really like to move on and try to edit. Cheers. ] (]) 01:20, 13 August 2024 (UTC) | ||
| :::::::Despite the path you appear to be stuck on, there are still signs that you care to learn and improve from ], which is why I jumped in above. For editors that are clearly wasting the community's time, I wouldn't have bothered. If you genuinely want to improve and change course, the comments above should help with that personal journey. I actually had Valereee's talk page on my watchlist for a short time after she left a note on my talk page earlier this year. Of course, I don't want you to feel ''hounded'', so I can certainly abstain from providing feedback (on pages other than your talk page) if that is your desire. --] (]) 03:05, 13 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Help (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:M.Bitton&diff=prev&oldid=1239463772) == | == Help (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:M.Bitton&diff=prev&oldid=1239463772) == | ||
Revision as of 03:05, 13 August 2024
| Admins: If you think an admin action I've taken recently is wrong or unhelpful, or one I've taken in the past is no longer useful, go ahead and undo or change it without feeling like you have to talk to me first. An explanation in the edit summary is always helpful, but I trust your judgement. |
Need help and don't know where to find it? Help!
 | Scam Watch
Warning: There is an on-going scam targeting people who would like Misplaced Pages to have an article about them. See this scam warning for detailed information. No ethical Misplaced Pages editor or administrator will offer to create an article for money. If you've been scammed please send details to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org to help others who could be future victims of this scam. |
Gourmand Cookbook Award
 | This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
I came across this award reviewing a draft and it appears to be a notable award mentioned in several articles. Thought you might be interested in creating an article. See also es:Gourmand World Cookbook Awards. S0091 (talk) 16:09, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hm, it has an entry in 8 language wikis. Definitely seems worth investigating, thanks! Valereee (talk) 17:37, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 32, 2024)
 Smiling woman
Hello, Valereee. The article for improvement of the week is:
Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: List of public art in Chicago • Cape (geography) Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot 00:05, 5 August 2024 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • Opt-out instructions |
|---|
Request for Third Opinion on Edits to Doping in China
I got to admit that I don't have extensive Misplaced Pages experience like you do. But you left an impression on me on Qin Haiyang's talk page in July that you understand Misplaced Pages and know what content is acceptable and what's not. And I think you make an excellent impartial judge. On Doping in China, I added information to this chapter titled (Trimetazidine revelations/allegations in Chinese swimming). This is the version that I made it to. And this is the version that 3 others keep deleting updates and reverting to. Despite my efforts, I feel that productive discussion with the other editors has not been possible. Therefore, I am seeking your help for an honest third opinion on which version better adheres to Misplaced Pages's content guidelines and provides more value to readers. Your expertise and impartial judgment would be greatly appreciated in resolving this matter. Thank you for considering my request. 49.179.43.130 (talk) 10:07, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Tech News: 2024-32
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Feature news
Two new parser functions will be available this week: {{#dir}}and{{#bcp47}}. These will reduce the need forTemplate:DirandTemplate:BCP47on Commons and allow us to drop 100 million rows from the "what links here" database. Editors at any wiki that use these templates, can help by replacing the templates with these new functions. The templates at Commons will be updated during the Hackathon at Wikimania.- Communities can request the activation of the visual editor on entire namespaces where discussions sometimes happen (for instance Misplaced Pages: or Wikisource: namespaces) if they understand the known limitations. For discussions, users can already use DiscussionTools in these namespaces.
- The tracking category "Pages using Timeline" has been renamed to "Pages using the EasyTimeline extension" in TranslateWiki. Wikis that have created the category locally should rename their local creation to match.
Project updates
- Editors who help to organize WikiProjects and similar on-wiki collaborations, are invited to share ideas and examples of successful collaborations with the Campaigns and Programs teams. You can fill out a brief survey or share your thoughts on the talkpage. The teams are particularly looking for details about successful collaborations on non-English wikis.
- The new parser is being rolled out on Wikivoyage wikis over the next few months. The English Wikivoyage and Hebrew Wikivoyage were switched to Parsoid last week. For more information, see Parsoid/Parser Unification.
Learn more
- There will be more than 200 sessions at Wikimania this week. Here is a summary of some of the key sessions related to the product and technology area.
- The latest Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin is available.
- The latest quarterly Language and Internationalization newsletter is available. It includes: New design previews for Translatable pages; Updates about MinT for Wiki Readers; the release of Translation dumps; and more.
- The latest quarterly Growth newsletter is available.
- The latest monthly MediaWiki Product Insights newsletter is available.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
MediaWiki message delivery 20:41, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – August 2024
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2024).
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Technical news
- Global blocks may now target accounts as well as IP's. Administrators may locally unblock when appropriate.
- Users wishing to permanently leave may now request "vanishing" via Special:GlobalVanishRequest. Processed requests will result in the user being renamed, their recovery email being removed, and their account being globally locked.
Arbitration
- The Arbitration Committee appointed the following administrators to the conflict of interest volunteer response team: Bilby, Extraordinary Writ
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:00, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Question
Valereee, I don't want the talk page to drag on as I feel like other users have made their decision on how they stand on me. To clarify, is me discussing on the talk page like this here still sealioning? I just want to know I'm at least heading in the right direction and would appreciate guidance. If you can't offer it either, if you could point me in the direction of an area on the site that can, I'd be grateful. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:26, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I haven't assessed the situation at Talk:The Inner Sanctum Mysteries (film series), but you have contributed nearly 80% of the text on that talk page, so in all likelihood, yes, you're sealioning there. Valereee (talk) 13:19, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Okay. I appreciate you telling me. I'm really really confused on the topic as its predominantly about content without a source being added. What would be a better approach? Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:30, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- As difficult as sealioning is to prove and assess, it often seems equally difficult for those doing it to understand what they're doing. Others do this:
- They accept it when consensus is against them, even if they think that consensus is wrong
- They don't ask for explanations over and over again when people have already explained, even if they don't feel the explanation is correct
- They avoid generating huge amounts of text for others to wade through
- Honestly, since you don't really understand it and can't seem to help yourself, you'd be best off just making a rule for yourself that you will limit yourself to one argument per section on a talk page (and this doesn't mean open a new section every time you have a followup question; one and done, that's it), and never reverting any nonvandalistic edit within any article more than once. Valereee (talk) 14:42, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- That's probably a good rule of thumb for me going forward. This is the kind of advice I was sort of looking for from the beginning. I know I've caused a lot of editors grief and frustration and I want to be easier to deal with, so I'll try to say thank you and try not to pester you further. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:46, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- As difficult as sealioning is to prove and assess, it often seems equally difficult for those doing it to understand what they're doing. Others do this:
- Okay. I appreciate you telling me. I'm really really confused on the topic as its predominantly about content without a source being added. What would be a better approach? Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:30, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think that percentage one is a bit misleading. Most of the information added to the article was what I had added as well, but with a source. Some of the information it was replaced with changed some things (release dates, etc.) without a source. So I know you haven't looked into it, but I think that may factor in here if we are trying to reach brass tacks about it. But I could be wrong, I appreciate you taking the time to check it out. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:33, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hey Valereee, I don't really expect you to use me as some sort of guidance, but I feel like any suggestion I make on that talk page when I ask for something as wikipedia basic as a source is being snarked at me sealioning. This is why I re-did the article in the first place as content was unsourced and I expanded it with what little sources I could find. I feel like locking me out here or feeling like i'm on watch has given any user I respond to just leaping on me that i'm on the attack. I really don't know what I should or should not comment when suggestions are immediately responded with attacks. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:56, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- I get it. It's not fun, but when someone exhibits a behavior -- and sealioning, as I've pointed out, is an incredibly frustrating and difficult to deal with behavior -- people do kind of watch for that behavior to happen again and probably scrutinize for it more carefully than they otherwise would. I've started a section at the page to help try to moderate, but you did say you thought only responding once within a given section -- and not opening new sections to allow you to follow up -- was a good idea, but you aren't really doing that. Do you really need to keep asking for sources when multiple others are telling you they believe the sources are sufficient? Can you maybe consider walking away for a while, giving people a chance to work, and then maybe circle back in six months? Valereee (talk) 18:12, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Valereee, with all respect you did not even let me respond to you talk page post you removed here. My issue is that nearly all content being suggested to be added is without any source. This series is complex as many old hollywood films are. As you can see from the Dracula (Universal film series) article, academics do not even agree with what should belong to that series. It grows even more complex with the Universal Monsters and the suggestions assume some films belong, others do not. I'm also trying to avoid WP:OR and WP:RS and I think anyone vaguely familiar with these rules would.
- I get it. It's not fun, but when someone exhibits a behavior -- and sealioning, as I've pointed out, is an incredibly frustrating and difficult to deal with behavior -- people do kind of watch for that behavior to happen again and probably scrutinize for it more carefully than they otherwise would. I've started a section at the page to help try to moderate, but you did say you thought only responding once within a given section -- and not opening new sections to allow you to follow up -- was a good idea, but you aren't really doing that. Do you really need to keep asking for sources when multiple others are telling you they believe the sources are sufficient? Can you maybe consider walking away for a while, giving people a chance to work, and then maybe circle back in six months? Valereee (talk) 18:12, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
I really appreciated the olive branch you tossed out with your question towards me, I only wish you gave me time to reply, because I was really trying not to make it a wall of text, calling out any specific editors, but still clearly getting my point across. As I've stated on your talk page before that. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:39, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, @Andrzejbanas, but it's been too much. The consensus remark was the last straw for me. Valereee (talk) 18:50, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm aware of what your reasoning. I was really excited you asked me for my opinion as I felt like at least one user wasn't seeing me as a sealioning, and I responded to it here as I felt you were discussing content and not user actions.
- Prior to your entry to the article and my banning from it, I asked questions before even editing it to shake a perceived notion that i'm owning it or anything. an editor even encouraged me to go ahead without asking. Suddenly, once users tagged me as a sealion, I've been watched with hawk eyes for anything resembling sea lioning. I appreciate you giving me a chance, but I'm just really disappointed with your course of action. I hope if we edit again in the future, we can apply WP:ETIQUETTE and I'm not out to trap any other editor. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:14, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Felt the need to jump in here. While there are a number of examples we could look at, Andrzejbanas, let's use the one you just provided. You had an opportunity to course correct in this discussion and move closer to compromise, right up to the point you dropped this comment: "
You are really obsessed with cast and crew.
" Any goodwill you should have been attempting to salvage or earn back from your peers at that article gets sabotaged with comments like that, which places others back into a defensive posture. DisneyMetalhead had just left you some positive feedback, showing a willingness to compromise and move forward, yet you proceeded in typical fashion with a narrow, self-serving focus. A great opportunity to mend relations was lost here; many editors with your experience would have instantly recognized this as the perfect time to pause and simply "thank" DMh for the kind feedback.Littered throughout these talk page discussions are reminders from you directed at other editors to remain WP:CIVIL and to focus on content, like you did recently here and here, yet you aren't heeding your own advice when you call out another user's obsession, or especially when you launch a personal attack. Have you read WP:POTKETTLE? You speak about all this animosity and unfair judgement directed at you, but the underlying issue is failing to take accountability for your own actions and behavior. --GoneIn60 (talk) 21:45, 12 August 2024 (UTC)- @GoneIn60:, I'm going to acknowledge that I have been full of contradictions. Thanks for pointing this out. I've also posted several times (and if you are were traipsing through my comments, I said that lately, I've felt like I've been watched like a hawk for people trying to catch me slipping up." Thank you for confirming that is exactly what is happening. Not sure what the end goal of this is, but yes, it might have made my etiquette slip. If you want to discuss with me on what I can do and how you could help. Fantastic. Would love to hear it. Perhaps on my talk page or yours. You made good points and I'll be an adult and respect them. As stated, I feel like I've got hawk eyes on me for any edits as of late. Please discuss with me on my talk page, as I'm feeling a bit hounded. I've already apologized to you for past incidents, which is you know, following WP:ETIQUETTE. I'd suggest you follow the previous rule, and I really don't think it would be respectful to just link to a bunch of diff pages as I would really like to move on and try to edit. Cheers. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:20, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Despite the path you appear to be stuck on, there are still signs that you care to learn and improve from a discussion we had, which is why I jumped in above. For editors that are clearly wasting the community's time, I wouldn't have bothered. If you genuinely want to improve and change course, the comments above should help with that personal journey. I actually had Valereee's talk page on my watchlist for a short time after she left a note on my talk page earlier this year. Of course, I don't want you to feel hounded, so I can certainly abstain from providing feedback (on pages other than your talk page) if that is your desire. --GoneIn60 (talk) 03:05, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- @GoneIn60:, I'm going to acknowledge that I have been full of contradictions. Thanks for pointing this out. I've also posted several times (and if you are were traipsing through my comments, I said that lately, I've felt like I've been watched like a hawk for people trying to catch me slipping up." Thank you for confirming that is exactly what is happening. Not sure what the end goal of this is, but yes, it might have made my etiquette slip. If you want to discuss with me on what I can do and how you could help. Fantastic. Would love to hear it. Perhaps on my talk page or yours. You made good points and I'll be an adult and respect them. As stated, I feel like I've got hawk eyes on me for any edits as of late. Please discuss with me on my talk page, as I'm feeling a bit hounded. I've already apologized to you for past incidents, which is you know, following WP:ETIQUETTE. I'd suggest you follow the previous rule, and I really don't think it would be respectful to just link to a bunch of diff pages as I would really like to move on and try to edit. Cheers. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:20, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Felt the need to jump in here. While there are a number of examples we could look at, Andrzejbanas, let's use the one you just provided. You had an opportunity to course correct in this discussion and move closer to compromise, right up to the point you dropped this comment: "
Help (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:M.Bitton&diff=prev&oldid=1239463772)
Hi. This user, unfortunately, wasn't respectful to me; "You're no longer welcome here", what a bad message. How can I solve it? JacktheBrown (talk) 12:48, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- It looks to me as though they mean their talk page? Knitsey (talk) 12:52, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- ^^ this. You can solve it by no longer going to their talk page. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 12:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Writ Keeper: I no longer have any interest in writing to this user; it's still a very disrespectful and rude message (I've never rejected anyone on my talk page). JacktheBrown (talk) 13:03, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it looks like that editor is telling you you aren't welcome on their talk page. Unless there is some compelling reason you need to post to their talk page (such as a required notification), just keep any discussion you have with them on article talks. Valereee (talk) 13:00, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Valereee: thank you. Have a nice day! You too, Knitsey and Writ Keeper. JacktheBrown (talk) 13:07, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- ^^ this. You can solve it by no longer going to their talk page. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 12:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Some falafel for you!
|
Saw the interesting page you started on food controversy. That's great coverage of this notable subject in the appropriate place. Thanks. SPECIFICO talk 15:18, 11 August 2024 (UTC) |
- Thanks! I'm not too sure about where it seems to be headed at this point lol... Valereee (talk) 15:31, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- And falafel is on the menu for dinner tonight at our house. :D Valereee (talk) 15:32, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm smart enough not to inquire as to which legume. SPECIFICO talk 15:37, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker), have you come across any literature discussing pita bread in this context? I remember reviewing Israeli pita a long time ago and feeling like it was a POV-fork, but I didn't have any academic sources on hand with which I could evaluate that suspicion. signed, Rosguill 15:45, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I've seen sources argue about who invented pita, but unfortunately I don't remember any actual academic ones, but I would be shocked if they aren't out there. That Israeli pita article looks like a fork to me, too.
- Speaking purely from an OR standpoint: what we call pita (a flat bread with a pocket) is quite likely just a happy accident from very-quickly making and cooking flatbread, which is a type of bread that has been made since humans started grinding grain into flour in order to cook it faster. The fact you end up with a pocket helps the bread cook more quickly. Then the pocket collapses and the bread becomes easy to stack in a small space and transport without being crushed, which was probably what people were going for. So when our article is arguing that the pockets were some sort of modern development as a part of Israeli cuisine...unlikely. It's possible that intentionally going for the pockets in order to fill them is a recent development, and certainly possible that flatbread with intentional pockets developed among Jews migrating into the area and setting up non-nomadic households, though. Interesting question! Valereee (talk) 16:16, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- And falafel is on the menu for dinner tonight at our house. :D Valereee (talk) 15:32, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 33, 2024)
.svg) A fictional social network diagram
Hello, Valereee. The article for improvement of the week is:
Please be bold and help improve it! Previous selections: Happiness • List of public art in Chicago Get involved with the AFI project: Nominate an article • Review nominations Posted by: MusikBot 00:05, 12 August 2024 (UTC) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of WikiProject AFI • Opt-out instructions |
|---|
This Month in GLAM: July 2024
| ||||||
Sealioning and Etiquette
Thanks for the clear response on DMh's talk page about the Xfd. I don't want this to be a big headache for anyone, but I want some clarity. If you could explain the actions or my questions, I'd feel really satisfied and can edit with a clearer head. Being banned for saying "I don't know what consensus between two editors is supposed to be", was a "last straw". I'm sorry, I just really am struggling to see how this was sealioning, antagonistic, uncivil, without etiquette or anything that was ban-worthy. Maybe it was a sliver flippant, and if so, I'm sorry. I feel like I'm being watched like a hawk and editors are calling me a sealion every second edit I make. I've re-read what I wrote and meant it like "we're getting nowhere." I'm not sure how you read it, but I really want to understand so I feel I can edit comfortably and not bother you or any other editor.
As users are expecting me to respond to edits, locking me out from a talk page where I was what I believed to relatively civil conversation with editors. I'd really relish the opportunity to try and improve the article with them. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:26, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Scratch this. I'm going with it's the "when it's you and I". That was really uncalled for and I was wrong. I think its hang over from the editor removing my deletion of image requests, and editors constantly saying i'm a sealion and I can't be trusted. I feel like editors can get on scott free, and I've had issues with the editor removing cited material and replacing it with unsourced content here: here, removing deletion requests here, and our conversations boil down to saying "this information is noteworthy". I should step away though. You are correct. I'm sorry for wasting your time. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:39, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 12
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
- Jollof rice
- added a link pointing to Semafor
- Ludo Lefebvre
- added a link pointing to Eater
(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 20:33, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Tech News: 2024-33
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Feature news
- AbuseFilter editors and maintainers can now make a CAPTCHA show if a filter matches an edit. This allows communities to quickly respond to spamming by automated bots.
- Stewards can now specify if global blocks should prevent account creation. Before this change by the Trust and Safety Product Team, all global blocks would prevent account creation. This will allow stewards to reduce the unintended side-effects of global blocks on IP addresses.
Project updates
- Nominations are open on Wikitech for new members to refresh the Toolforge standards committee. The committee oversees the Toolforge Right to fork policy and Abandoned tool policy among other duties. Nominations will remain open until at least 2024-08-26.
- One new wiki has been created: a Misplaced Pages in West Coast Bajau (
w:bdr:)
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.