User talk:Amortias/Archives/2020/September
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Amortias. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity
Established policy provides for removal of the administrative permissions of users who have not made any edits or logged actions in the preceding twelve months. Because you have been inactive, your administrative permissions will be removed if you do not return to activity within the next month.
Inactive administrators are encouraged to rejoin the project in earnest rather than to make token edits to avoid loss of administrative permissions. Resources and support for reengaging with the project are available at Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/administrators. If you do not intend to rejoin the project in the foreseeable future, please consider voluntarily resigning your administrative permissions by making a request at the bureaucrats' noticeboard.
Thank you for your past contributions to the project. — JJMC89 bot 00:04, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
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
orshould
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.
Check-In
Right that unplanned wikibreak was longer than expected. Back to the grind. Amortias (T)(C) 12:49, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
I see you deleted an earlier revision of Genies, Inc. for copyvios. The current revision looks like almost a copy-paste of the one you deleted, but I can't find what it's a copyvio of. Could you take a look at it? Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:51, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- @RoySmith: Sure lemme finish up the one im on then will give it another look. Amortias (T)(C) 19:54, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Original was a copyvio of [1]. Current version is showing up as <2% vio chance on the tools. Amortias (T)(C) 20:04, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- OK, thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:21, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Original was a copyvio of [1]. Current version is showing up as <2% vio chance on the tools. Amortias (T)(C) 20:04, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 21:34, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Untitled section
Hi Amortias,
Thank you for reaching out, but it wasn't a mistake I removed the content because its not reliable and its misinformation. Most of the content is not accurate at all, so please remove what I already removed and you can contact me anytime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahy Elwerdany (talk • contribs) 13:18, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Shahy Elwerdany: The sections were supported by third party references backing up the statements made in the article. If you wish to sispute the suitability of ther inclusion you will need to tak ethis up on the talk page of the article rather than blanket removing supported information. Amortias (T)(C) 13:22, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Apologies
A wrote another comment and then saw your message in notification.
I will further stop all conversations on that page. Zoticus777 (talk) 13:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you. That looks like an Ignore All Rules A10 to get rid of something that needed getting rid of a little quicker. If the author were to take it to DRV, which they won't, I would be Neutral because it wasn't a proper A10 as the rule is written, but it needed deleting. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:02, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Hidden edit summary
Thanks for dealing with the vandalism at [2], but I wonder if you could disclose the edit summary? Or at least comment on whether you think this is pure vandalism? I am concerned that based on WP:DEPROD it could be argued that all of those articles were deprodded in good faith and now need to go to AfD... sigh. The only way to prevent this is to clarify that the edit summary clearly indicates those edits were vandalism and not good faithed dePRODs. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:57, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) @Piotrus: I consider the removals bad faith. The edit summaries were personal attacks against you as the PRODer and against a class of Wikipedians. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:59, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you. Would either of you consider reviewing the PRODs and declining them or executing based on their merits and that of the articles, to avoid confusing a different editor who may decline the PROs on technical grounds empowering the vandal? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:42, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I think they've all been addressed (deleted/redirected/DEPRODed) except for the last one, which has more time left until it can be deleted. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:56, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you. Would either of you consider reviewing the PRODs and declining them or executing based on their merits and that of the articles, to avoid confusing a different editor who may decline the PROs on technical grounds empowering the vandal? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:42, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Article about Coinmate
Hi Amortias, I want to add Coinmate - cryptocurrency exchange to Wikipedia because it is my favorite crypto exchange. I wrote to their co-founders to find more about their history, and I did some research. Why am I not allowed to add them when other crypto exchanges do have their own pages like Binance or Coinbase? Thanks for your reply — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vrsasi (talk • contribs) 08:53, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Vrsasi: for inclusion in Wikipedia you would need to show how the cryptocurrency meets the criteria for notability. This would need to be demonstrated by using independent third party reliable sources. without these it would not be able to be included. The article itself would need to also be written in an appropriate tone and from a neutral point of view. The article that was submitted did not meet these criteria and appeared to be aimed at promoting the currency/company providing it, rather than being wirtten as an encyclopedic article. Amortias (T)(C) 16:39, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Harry Styles on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 20:31, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors September 2020 Newsletter
Guild of Copy Editors September 2020 Newsletter
  Hello and welcome to the September GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2020. Current and upcoming events
September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today! Election reminder: our end-of-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 December. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. Drive and Blitz reports
June Blitz: An uncorrected typo (even copy editors make copy editing mistakes!) led to an eight-day "leap blitz" from 14 to 21 June, focusing on requests and articles tagged in May. 19 participating editors claimed 54 copy edits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. July Drive: Over 750,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event, keeping pace with the previous three self-isolated drives. Of the 38 people who signed up, 30 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here. August Blitz: From 16 to 22 August, we copy edited articles tagged in June and July 2020 and requests. 12 participating editors completed 37 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Other news
June election: Jonesey95 was chosen to continue as lead coordinator, assisted by Baffle gab1978, Tdslk, Twofingered Typist, and first-time coordinator Puddleglum2.0. Reidgreg took a break after serving for a couple years. Thanks to everyone who participated! Progress report: As of 01:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 532 requests since 1 January and there were 38 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 433 (see monthly progress graph above). Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Puddleglum2.0, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.
|
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
2020–21 Los Angeles Kings season
I noticed that you removed this article because a similar article had basically the same name. The article that currently exists should be redirected to the deleted article name. 2020–21 (or earlier years) is the standard normally used in sports team season articles such as 2019–20 Los Angeles Kings season. The article title 2020-21 Los Angeles Kings season is incorrect. Deadman137 (talk) 17:40, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Carrier wave on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
The Signpost: 27 September 2020
- Special report: Paid editing with political connections
- News and notes: More large-scale errors at a "small" wiki
- In the media: WIPO, Seigenthaler incident 15 years later
- Featured content: Life finds a Way
- Arbitration report: Clarifications and requests
- Traffic report: Is there no justice?
- Recent research: Wikipedia's flood biases
The Signpost: 27 September 2020
- Special report: Paid editing with political connections
- News and notes: More large-scale errors at a "small" wiki
- In the media: WIPO, Seigenthaler incident 15 years later
- Featured content: Life finds a Way
- Arbitration report: Clarifications and requests
- Traffic report: Is there no justice?
- Recent research: Wikipedia's flood biases
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at User talk:LukeEmily on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 07:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)