User talk:Kudpung/Archive Dec 2018

The Signpost: 1 December 2018
 * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:47, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2018
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2018). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg Al Ameer son • Randykitty • Spartaz
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Boson • Daniel J. Leivick • Efe • Esanchez7587 • Fred Bauder • Garzo • Martijn Hoekstra • Orangemike

Interface administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svgk Chan

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a request for comment, the Mediation Committee is now closed and will no longer be accepting case requests.
 * A request for comment is in progress to determine whether members of the Bot Approvals Group should satisfy activity requirements in order to remain in that role.
 * A request for comment is in progress regarding whether to change the administrator inactivity policy, such that administrators "who have made no logged administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped". Currently, the policy states that administrators "who have made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped".
 * A proposal has been made to temporarily restrict editing of the Main Page to interface administrators in order to mitigate the impact of compromised accounts.

Technical news
 * Administrators and bureaucrats can no longer unblock themselves unless they placed the block initially. This change has been implemented globally. See also this ongoing village pump discussion (permalink).
 * To complement the aforementioned change, blocked administrators will soon have the ability to block the administrator that placed their block to mitigate the possibility of a compromised administrator account blocking all other active administrators.
 * Since deployment of Partial blocks on Test Wikipedia, several bugs were identified. Most of them are now fixed. Administrators are encouraged to test the new deployment and report new bugs on Phabricator or leave feedback on the Project's talk page. You can request administrator access on the Test Wiki here.

Arbitration
 * Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 3 December 2018. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous
 * In late November, an attacker compromised multiple accounts, including at least four administrator accounts, and used them to vandalize Wikipedia. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. Sharing the same password across multiple websites makes your account vulnerable, especially if your password was used on a website that suffered a data breach. As these incidents have shown, these concerns are not pure fantasies.
 * Wikipedia policy requires administrators to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

Obituaries
 * (Raymond Arritt) passed away on 14 November 2018. Boris joined Wikipedia as on 8 May 2006 and was an administrator from 30 July 2007 to 2 June 2008.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:36, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Derrick Sherwin
That editor is wrong, BTW. Actually WP:V does not say such material can't be kept. If that was true, there'd be no such thing as templates existing to put in articles, noting things are unsourced! That being said. I don't know why the text is in that section, what's it's relevance is, etc. I don't mean anything negative by that, but any attempt to restore the text, should improve it so that such questions don't exist. Though that doesn't allow editors to reference non-existent rules. One is always free to improve and source text, rather than simply deleting it! Nfitz (talk) 01:57, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , as you  have rightly pointed out, 's comment  does not defend his action in  any  way.  It  is naturally up  to  him  to familiarise himself with  policies and guidelines,  after all, he has created an admirable 176  new articles himself and Dr Who seems to  be a special  focus of his. I  do  notice from  a brief review of his  talk  page archives  that a significant  number of comments  appear to be about  questionable removals of content, made yet more poignant by  your comment  here.  He should at least  try  to  adopt a more collaborative approach  to  his editing and not  lecture me on content  rules -  over the years I  have been instrumental in  developing  some of the  notability  requirements and content  control on  Wikipedia and  I  am always open to  discussion  about  my  own edits. (FYI: ). Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:27, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * If you've been here so long, then why as it so hard to copy the actual content, instead of the numbered reference tags? mean, [4] and [5]? That's not helpful at all. Was it a lack of desire to contribute? It's a bit worrying, I do hope you can contribute towards this great site more effectively in the future, we're always here if you need pointers. Cheers! --  Alex TW 02:31, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * You can drop  the snark, it's precicely  your kind of drama mongering that puts people  off wanting to collaborate at all. I've pointed out the misgivings over your own editing. (FYI ). Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:54, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I enjoy collaborating! Collaborating effectively, that is, not having to clean up after other people, I guess there's a difference. --  Alex TW 07:49, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , I said 'drop the drama' -  collaborating  effectively  does not include snark  and winding  people up . Please don't  post  here again. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:58, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Dud redirect at Webbed foot
Hi Kudpung, How are you keep, lad? I was wondering if your available, can you please remove Webbed foot. I intend to put this draft at Draft:Webbed foot into its place, assuming it passed copyvio. Thanks.  scope_creep Talk  19:54, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , On taking a quick look, I'm not sure I understand this request. has edited the article recently and it looks perfectly in order to me. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:38, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It was in draft when I left a message. While I was away, and you were cogitating, somebody else stepped in, removed the old redirect and approved the draft into mainspace and stepped in and applied some extra fixes to the article. Its all done and dusted. Excellently reasearched article it is too.   scope_creep Talk  00:49, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

RFA question
No, the question's not about my RFA(s), but rather about someone else's. The question is, do you think that Requests for adminship/Foreverxnature should be deleted since the user who created it (i.e. self-nominated) has no chance of passing RFA now? (I previously tried to draw admin attention to this at WT:RFA but haven't gotten a response, so I figured maybe this would be faster.) IntoThinAir (talk) 04:55, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , please see the discussion  at  WT:RfA. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:57, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * So you think it should be deleted? I know that's what you said at WT:RFA ("I reallise the importance of on-boarding, but if these are from kids, or just a prank, I would be inclined to delete them, and take it from there.") but of course if you thought it should be deleted, surely you would've deleted it yourself. I am aware of the discussion you're referring to, having posted in that discussion already, but I'm not sure why you're pointing me to it. IntoThinAir (talk) 13:35, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , I still say that the place to discuss this is at WT:RfA. Abandoned RfAs are really a trivial matter, and not something that I or other admins want to spend much of their their time on.  Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 22:50, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

you
Have replied to your ping re Boleyn. Three things. They had already gone on a break by the time I asked them not to bi-weekly continue blanket templating an editor who is a friend of mine. [2] IE I was already defending a very prolific and informed editor who was on the verge of retiring. The irony is palatable! Third, did you read up... before saying I should be ashamed...which is a rather slanderous and smug thing to say, worse as you threw it out so flippantly. Seems to me you acted instinctively and emotionally, rather than with the facts at hand. Ceoil (talk) 23:00, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I had read that  entire thread at  's talk  page. I  was moved by the comment  by  de facto  coord of NPR, 's comment,  and  his  hard work at  NPR  following  in  my  footsteps as 'grandfather' of the process since I  resigned from coaxing  it  along  for  many  years (I was instrumental min  getting  the Curation  system developed, and this year  of achieving  WP:ACTRIAL  after a long  battle with  the WMF), and I  regard his work and collaboration  on  these projects  as  admirable - I  therefore largely  support his opinions. Without  NPR, Wikipedia would be full  of spam, adverts, attack pages, and other junk. (off topic): NPR  is a far more important  process than FA and demands a high  engagement from  its active operators. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:55, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Your reply is too self serving and evasive to make sense in plain English. Want to try again because now I dont know what the hell? Hint, I am wondering if either we are about handing ready to go templates to new editors and letting them run wild unsupervised, or standing up for and clinging to long term survivors that have demonstrated form and in fact make participation in the project worthwhile. I still dont get why I should be..."ashamed", but interested, as it was a heavy duty accusation. Ceoil  (talk) 01:02, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , I believe my message is quite  clear. Self-serving  (to  some extent) maybe, but  I  am adamant  that  the hard work  of myself and others in  protecting  the integrity  of Wikipedia's content  to  be paramount. It  also therefore puts–off topic–in  context the opinions we have had in  the past  expressed by  other prolific editors -  is FA not sometimes  a self-serving exercise? Loosing  vital  maintenance editors ls not  good, and I  will  do  everything I  can  to  support them. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:13, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Kudpung that kind of wishy washy *(I believe my message is quite  clear" is sub polotico speak), neither here nor there thinking is of no use to me. How do you feel about reiterating your claim that I should be..."ashamed". I suppose either put up or....If you have the courage of your convections I would like to hear them in non woolly terms. Or you could just retract and apologise.  Ceoil  (talk) 01:23, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , was I the first  to  mention  'shame' and/or incivility? It's a question  now of who  is being  rude to  whom -  please read my  'woolly' and 'wishy washy' comments again. I  for  my  part  have been around long  enough  to  develop  a thick skin,  but  IMO your comments to   were beyond the pale; notwithstanding, I  note  that  you  are also  supportive of users who  have been 'burned out',  so  I  am at  a loss to  understand your attitude. I  will  not  be responding  again, it's 08:30 am and I  have work  to  do  in  RL. FYI:, .  Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:44, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * So you believe that templating regulars is just fine, and those who heed caution, specially me in this instance, should be "ashamed". You could have said that 3 hours ago. I found your evasiveness all this time expatriating and deeply unimpressive; I just wanted to know where I stood, no more, not get blood out of a stone, which is what this became. Given this level of muddled thinking I suspect yo are often pleading ...must get to work or pinging guys to help (coward)...when not hounding for blocks, which it seems I might have faced next if I had not challenged you directly, Ceoil  (talk) 01:50, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , expatriating? "coward' is it now? Like I  said, I  have grown a thick  skin,  and I  am an admin  who  has never blocked anyone for  PA. Sorry, but  I'm  now in  the car on  my  way  to  work - yes, I  really still  do  a full-time job, but  that  is none of your business, and please give it  a rest with  your  constant  causing  edit  conflicts.  Over and out. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:05, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Yo Ho Ho


 Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  is wishing you Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's Solstice or Christmas, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah, Lenaia, Festivus or even the Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding ~ to your friends' talk pages.

 Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  14:03, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Buone Feste!


Merry Christmas from London ...

and a New Year filled with peace and happiness!

Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 08:39, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Season Greetings
 Merry Christmas

Hi, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,

May next year be prosperous and joyful.

– Scope creep Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 11.02, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas


Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas6}} to their talk page with a friendly message. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 12:34, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Kudpung!


Happy New Year! Kudpung, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Donner60 (talk) 08:02, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.