User talk:Guerillero/Archives/2020/September

Just a quick drive-by

To say THANK YOU for all the work you do behind the scenes, and to let you know it hasn't gone unnoticed. Perhaps if we're both in attendance at the next WikiCon, I'll be able to thank you in person. Happy editing! ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:33, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Atsme: Thank you! I will let you know if I am going to a big in-person event once covid is over --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 15:15, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Hijiri88 unblock request on UTRS

• https://utrs-beta.wmflabs.org/appeal/33345 This has languished for a couple of weeks. No longer familiar with the many issues. Restore TPA? Carry to WP:AN? Cheers, --Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:38, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Floquenbeam replied thusly on their talk page to my post.]--

    WP:AN/WP:ANI aren't really fit for purpose; I'd avoid that if there are other options. I don't do UTRS, so I don't know if this is a request to restore talk page access, or a request for unblock. If Hijiri explicitly and believably agrees to stop violating the iban, and Guerillero doesn't object, I'd suggest restoring talk page access, and any other unblock can be handled on-wiki. If they can't bring themselves to explicitly and believably agree to stop violating the iban, and argue that it was unfairly applied or it was a trap or it wasn't really an iban or the iban should never have been applied or ... then I'd decline. .

    --Deepfriedokra (talk) 15:01, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

    @Deepfriedokra: I don't have access to UTRS. My take is that Hijiri has been using their talk page access to do things other than appeal their block since they were blocked in April. If they are actually going to appeal their block and respect their i-ban, then go ahead and give them their TPA back. --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 15:25, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

    • I asked them to respond to this concern via UTRS, --Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 September newsletter

The fourth round of the competition has finished, with 865 points being required to qualify for the final round, nearly twice as many points as last year. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with 598 and 605 points being eliminated, and all but two of the contestants who reached the final round having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were

• Bloom6132, with 1478 points gained mainly from 5 featured lists, 12 DYKs and 63 in the news items;
• HaEr48 with 1318 points gained mainly from 2 featured articles, 5 good articles and 8 DYKs;
• Lee Vilenski with 1201 points mainly gained from 2 featured articles and 10 good articles.

Between them, contestants achieved 14 featured articles, 14 featured lists, 2 featured pictures, 87 good articles, 90 DYK entries, 75 ITN entries, 95 featured article candidate reviews and 81 good article reviews. Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Infobox probation

Hello Guerillero, Can you please explain what I have done to earn possible infobox probation? I don't see what I did wrong. Thanks, I-82-I | TALK 23:17, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

@I-82-I: Please view the AE thread about you particularity this edit --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 23:22, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

How is this revert breaking any rules? This isn't edit warring by any stretch of the word. I performed only a few reverts, and they weren't on the same day. That is well within the allowed reverts I-82-I | TALK 23:42, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

List of descriptive plant epithets (I–Z)

Hi Guerillero. I completely understand why some reviewers might not want to review and support "half a list", so I'd like to get List of descriptive plant epithets (A–H), the 2nd half of the list, up at FLC, now that I've picked up my second support (from Chris). I can nominate the 2nd half if there are no unresolved issues with the 1st half. You called it "gorgeous" (thanks, that probably helped) but I don't know if you were satisfied by my edits and answers to your questions. - Dank (push to talk) 15:17, 31 August 2020 (UTC) Regarding the " if we add templates for every citation" sentence: see Chris's review for why we don't want to, say, add a hundred templates to the current list ... it's big enough already that Chris is having problems getting all the images to load. - Dank (push to talk) 15:25, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Dank: I'm in crunch time at work, but I will try to take a look this weekend --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 15:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I got a clarification that it was okay to nominate, but I'm still looking forward to any comments you have. - Dank (push to talk) 12:57, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Ok boomer

• I've taken the time to research what "OK boomer" means (hence my lack of response to it). Sadly, but somewhat not surprisingly, I've seen that it is a personal attack, it being an ageist slur. I'll give you 24 hours to apologise for making it, or it's to AN for you. Ironically, according to our article on the subject, the clock is Tik-Tok'ing away. Cassianto^Talk 18:03, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
  • @Cassianto: Boomer is a state of mind. As an irony poisoned millennial, I find the lack of any hit of self-awareness in your "spew attacks and then loudly complain when someone calls you out your bullshit without kid gloves" routine in a to be very boomer in character and, quite frankly, hilarious. The only thing that is making this all even funnier is your reaction to it; we can speak to the manager if you would like to. --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 18:30, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
    • Nope, I'm taking offence to it, as is my right under our flawed incivility policy. You're not telling me what to think or feel, are you? We have an article on it, in which it clearly states its ageist. See also this. I thought CIVILITY was all about how one feels about a comment being made and not the comment itself? You used it as an ageist slur against me as in your opinion, I'm not down with the kids. I may 'eff and jeff from time to time, and I may be grouchy when people prod, but never am I ageist, racist, sexist or bigoted. I'll let the arbs decipher your blatant personal attack against me as AN attracts trolls and it would get lost in the mire. Cassianto^Talk 18:39, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
      • Okay Karen? Sorry I couldn't resist. PackMecEng (talk) 19:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

      @Cassianto: No, It isn't that I think you aren't "down with the kids"; I think you are entitled, thin skinned, and a bully. As Chlöe Swarbrick says, "Boomer is a state of mind." You were the person screaming at the store manager trying to get a cashier fired because they responded to "thank you" with "no problem."

      The parade of middle-aged white millionaires at conservative publications who are aghast that someone is actually calling them out on their bullshit is neither here nor there. --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 19:19, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

      Guerillero, I'm sorry, I can't decipher this gibberish. Oh dear, further down the incivility route you go. Cut and run, that's what I'll do with the likes of you. You are far too toxic to engage with. Cassianto^Talk 19:47, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

      @Cassianto: Do what you wish --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 20:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

RevDel request

Hi Guerillero,

It is a long time since we interacted but I still remember you! Per your willingless indicated at Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests, please could you RevDel the edit I reverted at Credit report. Best wishes, Polyamorph (talk) 08:49, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

@Polyamorph: It looks like an OSer already removed it. I hope you are well --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 14:36, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Arbitration Appeal

You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#2020 Infobox Arbitration Enforcement and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.

Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:38, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Proposal

Please see my proposal at Talk:Rosh_Hashanah#Postponement_rules. Debresser (talk) 11:11, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Alexiod Palaiologos

There was talk of a warning at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive270#Alexiod Palaiologos. Did anything ever come of it? –dlthewave ☎ 17:08, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

@Dlthewave: Sorry, it fell through the cracks as my job got more busy --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 23:32, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Question: Given that Alexiod didn't even bother to change accounts before posting this, does User:Warlightyahoo merit a sock check? Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 21:41, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

@Finngall: They are  Unrelated --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 22:20, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

FLCs

Hi there, you very kindly reviewed my 1961 country number ones FLC, I was wondering whether you might look at the equivalent for 1962 if you have a spare moment?

Cheers! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:22, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Something does not smell right

Hi Guerillero, can you please take a look at user Mustyminge? They are are a new user creating multiple user subpages like User:Mustyminge/RF alt. S0091 (talk) 23:40, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

@S0091: That looks weird to me, but I can find a match in the CU data. Let me know if they move beyond their user space and I will take another look --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 23:55, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Will do. I looked at their global contribs and just saw some playing around on Meta back in April so maybe that is all it is here. Thanks! S0091 (talk) 23:59, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Question for my Talk Page Stalkers

What GA category would you put Lion Attacking a Dromedary under? Art? Natural History? --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 05:20, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Not to make things more confusing, but the museum's removal from view weighs it more toward Social sciences and society/Culture. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 17:31, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

DS editnotice

Re. Template:Editnotices/Page/Amy Coney Barrett: as you're a clerk I guess you'll have more insight on this, but I'm curious why such notices exist? I've spoken to another clerk about such notices as well - their opinion was that such notices shouldn't really exist. My understanding was that DS alone (without any restrictions) does not require or suggest an editnotice, and since it can't contribute towards awareness I'm not sure how DS-only editnotices help?

Statistically they seem to be an anomaly and scattered around articles rarely, and since {{Ds/editnotice}} doesn't support these types natively usually it needs to be done as a hack (in the way that you did it, or with {{Ds/talk notice}}). ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 01:54, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

@ProcrastinatingReader: Clerks don't normally deal with DS. While the banner does not satisfy the notification requirements, it helps editors known that DS is in the area --Guerillero | Parlez Moi 14:23, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Hmm. Does that help with anything though, if it doesn’t contribute to awareness? My concern is just that it feels like contributing to unnecessary banner blindness / unnecessarily threatening especially when not applicable to most editors (nb a *lot* of pages fall under DS, if we consider all active DS). Plus inconsistent application seems confusing - It’s dotted around some pages but doesn’t really seem to be a pattern on when it’s shown and when it isn’t. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Amendment request: Civility in infobox discussions closed and archived

Amendment request: Civility in infobox discussions has been closed and archived. The archived amendment request can be viewed here.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 15:40, 29 September 2020 (UTC)