User talk:Writ Keeper/Archives/14

RevDel script
Hey WK, just wanted to say that I love the mass RevDel script; I've been wanting something like this for years but lacked the technical ability. I wonder ... is there any chance of adding an option for oversighters to suppress the edits? Thanks, HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  16:11, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Um, there is, but it'd be kinda awkward, since I wouldn't be able to test it out myself. I can give it a shot. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 18:59, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * @HJ Mitchell: Hmm, there are actually some interesting philosophical questions at play here. So, my initial UI plan is to have another button right next to the "Revdel selected entries" button that would work exactly the same way, but with oversight. But as I'm thinking about it, it occurs to me that I don't really know exactly how oversight works per se. Like, what happens if you *remove* oversight on something? Does it fall back to normal revdel, or does it become totally visible to everyone? Or can you choose between the two? How would you want that to work here? If you try to just plain revdel something that's already been oversighted, what do you expect that to do: drop the oversight down to normal revdel, or just do nothing, since it's already oversighted? How does it work right now? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:42, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The manual way is just another checkbox on the revdel interface (like this). Oversighters can leave it unticked to RevDel as an admin or tick it to suppress. They can also go to revisions that have been revdel'd by an admin and tick the extra box to upgrade to suppression. In reverse, oversighters can choose whether to remove restrictions from administrators (converting it to revdel) or to undelete it entirely. I'm not too worried about complicated things like unsuppressing but leaving deleted, there's less urgency there and they can be done manually, but the ability to suppress edits en masse from a troll on a spree would be really helpful. Best, HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  20:45, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
 * @HJ Mitchell:Okay, well, I winged it, but be aware that I can't test it the way I normally would, since I'm not an oversighter myself. The answers I've tried to implement are that removing oversight always drops the edit down to normal revdel; it does (or *should*) not undelete it entirely. (As a side effect of that implementation, one can't oversight some edits and un-oversight others at the same time, but that seems like a minor side effect in exchange for the rule of caution.) Trying to perform a normal revdel on an oversighted edit should (again, I *think*) not do anything at all. Unfortunately, I've also made it so that the "oversight" button shows up for everyone, since there's no convenient way to check whether a user is an oversighter or not. I think the oversight button will either perform normal revdels or just do nothing at all for a non-oversighter.
 * Anyway, the practical upshot of all this is that I *think* it will work the way I expect it to, but I'm not sure. So, if you want to test it out, you're more than welcome to use the contribs of my testing account (Special:Contributions/WK-test). If not, that's fine, of course, but it'd probably be better to try it out and make sue it works before using it in the wild. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

@HJ Mitchell: I have it on good authority that the oversight function works now. Sorry for the delay! Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:09, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I hate to tell you but it's b0rked again... :( Keilana (talk) 15:07, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 * @Keilana: details? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:52, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Just after I sent you that it started working again, so I think it was a one-time glitch where the popup didn't come up. Keilana (talk) 16:53, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Hmmm. It's possible that one of the API calls failed, which can happen, I guess. Not much I can do about that. Did you happen to notice if only some of the edits you were trying to work with got revealed, and if so, which ones didn't? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:57, 10 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the tardiness, real life as been a bit hectic recently, but it does indeed work now and I've just used it in anger for the first time. Thanks very much, WK! HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  20:25, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Um, well, "in anger" is probably not the best way for it to be used, but I'm happy it's helpful. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:52, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Heh, figure of speech. ;) HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  23:11, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Please help if you're there
Are you gone? :-( If you're still somewhat around, could you take a look at your "semiprotect all" tool, please? I really need it, there's an anon on a rampage against a particular user and all his pages. Disgusting vandalism, a bit like Kutsuit. Please see the bottom of my page. Bishonen &#124; talk 15:09, 3 November 2015 (UTC).
 * I'm not totally gone, but I doubt I'll be around much, except for things about writing or maintaining scripts like this. I'll look into it. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:25, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, cool, thank you. I guess you have an e-mail alert on your talkpage, just like my clever socks have on theirs. Busy, huh? Bishonen &#124; talk 17:17, 3 November 2015 (UTC).
 * Yup, I've set an email notification for pings, too, so pings and talk page messages are pretty much the things I'll be responding to in the foreseeable future. Anyway, B, I think I fixed it; looks like the WMF or whoever changes something (for no apparent reason) on the backend which broke the script. Should be good now, though. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:03, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Help needed at DRN
You are receiving this message because you are signed up as a volunteer at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard. We have a number of pending requests which need a volunteer to address them. Unless you are an inexperienced volunteer who is currently just watching DRN to learn our processes, please take a case. If you do not see yourself taking cases in the foreseeable future, please remove yourself from the volunteer list so that we can have a better idea of the size of our pool of volunteers; if you do see yourself taking cases, please watchlist the DRN page and keep an eye out to see if there are cases which are ready for a volunteer. We have recently had to refuse a number of cases because they were listed for days with no volunteer willing to take them, despite there being almost 150 volunteers listed on the volunteer page. Regards, (Current DRN coordinator) (Not watching this page) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:52, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Christpoher M. Still listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Christpoher M. Still. Since you had some involvement with the Christpoher M. Still redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Herostratus (talk) 15:24, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello friend
Hey! Sorry to hear you're becoming less active, though maybe on your end it's a good thing. Just wanted you to know that next time someone requests a user script and I'm busy with other matters, I still expect you to step in and write it for me, okay? :) Seriously, hope all is well, and if you want extra non-admin rights let me know. Cheers &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  15:23, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * @MusikAnimal: Oh, well, I won't be *that* far. I'll still respond to pings, talk page requests, emails, and the like, so you can still foist off your busywork onto me if you need. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:36, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Additional permissions
Hi WK. Following your resignation of the admin bit, a user has been requesting several rights (such as rollback, PCR, etc.) on your behalf. They were all rejected because you didn't personally request them, although it was noted that you could request the rights at any time. So, are there any other permissions you would like to have? Since you were a former admin and 'crat who resigned in good standing, I'm quite certain that you could have any right you asked for. Note that I'm an admin who does work at PERM, so if you want anything, just ping me. Biblio (talk) 16:36, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * @Biblioworm:Yeah, I saw that. Thanks. It was a little weird, but it's whatever, I guess. I wouldn't mind rollback, I suppose: there are a few scripts that I maintain that use it. Other than that, I'm probably good for now. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:38, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ :) ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  20:39, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * jeez, people sure are eager to change my userrights. Between you and 28B, I don't think I've had to wait 5 minutes, MusikAnimal is giving me rights I haven't asked for, and even non-admins are trying to get in on it unprompted. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Haha, well I only added autopatrolled as it doesn't affect you. This brings back up concerns others have made in the past on whether it can be removed purely by preference, which is debatable... but I assume you're ok with not contributing to the backlog :) &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  20:47, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome back!
As a recently returned sysop, welcome back to the admin corps. We always need help at WP:ADMINBACKLOG if there are any areas you can help with that would be most welcomed. Happy mopping! — xaosflux  Talk 23:35, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Mass revdel
Would it be possible to add a select all box on the mass revdel script? If there is already one, I may have just missed it. I think I just did 300 or so, would have been helpful for doing them in 50 revision batches. --kelapstick(bainuu) 04:36, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Definitely, the "Select all" and "Select none" buttons are in the top row next on the left side, next to the "delete content" etc checkboxes. You could also expand Special:Contribs to show up to batches of 500, and get 'em all revdel'd in one go :) &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  06:01, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Well shit. There it is. I will have to check again when I am on IE, because some things don't work there (like the twinkle block module still, it still asks me for a duration when I try to block indef). I guess I was looking for a little checkbox. Also, I got capped out at 50 revdels (I got an error message when I tried to do more than 50, again on IE, not sure about others). Thanks for pointing out what should have been obvious :) --kelapstick(bainuu) 10:09, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, good to hear that things worked out, mostly. I don't know about capping out at 50; I perhaps unsurprisingly wasn't motivated enough to work on it on that kind of scale. I'll take a look later. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:42, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay yeah, it's as I thought:the API itself has a limit of 50 revdels at once. It's 500 for bots, but 50 for everyone else. I'll look into putting a warning or notification or something Later. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:50, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Damn, I'm better at this than I thought: it already does that. Arright then, carry on. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 22:29, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

DRN help needed and volunteer roll call
You are receiving this message because you have listed yourself on the list of volunteers at Dispute resolution noticeboard/Volunteering.

First, assistance is needed at DRN. We have recently closed a number of cases without any services being provided for lack of a volunteer willing to take the case. There are at least three cases awaiting a volunteer at this moment. Please consider taking one.

Second, this is a volunteer roll call. If you remain interested in helping at DRN and are willing to actively do so by taking at least one case (and seeing it through) or helping with administrative matters at least once per calendar month, please add your name to this roll call list. Individuals currently on the principal volunteer list who do not add their name on the roll call list will be removed from the principal volunteer list after June 30, 2016 unless the DRN Coordinator chooses to retain their name for the best interest of DRN or the encyclopedia. Individuals whose names are removed after June 30, 2016, should feel free to re-add their names to the principal volunteer list, but are respectfully requested not to do so unless they are willing to take part at DRN at least one time per month as noted above. No one is going to be monitoring to see if you live up to that commitment, but we respectfully ask that you either live up to it or remove your name from the principal volunteer list.

Best regards, (Current DRN coordinator) (Not watching this page) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind....
...but I happened to be looking at Floq's talk page and saw your userpage js trick..... and have decided to use it for my own userpage. Let me know if that's an issue and I'll remove it. Mike1901 (talk) 12:14, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Ha, no, I don't mind at all; I wrote about it for it to be used. I'm happy you found it useful. :) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

XXNUKELEARPHYSICISTXX
Sorry Aboot my page didnt relaise i saved it =0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by XXNUKELEARPHYSICISTXX (talk • contribs) 18:00, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Cool, don't do it again. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 18:02, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for deleting my page, will no longer be contributing money to Wikipedia anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HYUTS (talk • contribs) 01:26, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 01:52, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Mass Rollback
Hi Writ, thanks for your Mass Rollback tool. I use it often. I'm curious if you'd ever consider adding functionality for edit summaries to be incorporated in the rollback. I am a huge fan of edit summaries and I think this would be very helpful for flagging sock operators and the like. For instance in this revert. Anyhow, just a thought. Thanks again for a useful tool! Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:43, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hm, no, I don't think that's possible. It uses the standard Wikipedia rollback, and I don't think there's a way to set an edit summary other than the canned one it always uses. I'll think about it, though.
 * Oh, nevermind, it's definitely possible. I'll do it soonish. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 04:00, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * @Cyphoidbomb: Done! :D Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 04:50, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Impressive, didn't think it was possible. - NQ (talk)  05:03, 11 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey, very cool, thanks for that! Can't wait to try it out! (Well, I mean, I'm not looking forward to the next sock operator, but you know what I mean. ) Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:56, 11 May 2016 (UTC)


 * So far, works great. Thanks Writ! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:13, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Excellent, glad I could help. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:07, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

User talk:Cunard
Hi Writ Keeper. You closed Articles for deletion/Alex Gilbert (TV Presenter). Would you provide advice for DmitryPopovRU at User talk:Cunard? Thanks, Cunard (talk) 03:02, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you
You are probably right. I am suprised to see such an emotional reaction. It's probably best to give this some time. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 22:32, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm obviously not really happy to see most of my comment deleted, including my signature, because I feel it misrepresents my comment but I'll ignore it for a couple of days. Thanks again for your help. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 22:39, 23 May 2016 (UTC)


 * @The Quixotic Potato: Honestly, I'd say just let it go altogether. As a person who is no more involved than being a watcher of Drmies's talk page, I can say that I thought your post read as pretty condescending myself. I know you didn't mean it like that, but...well, the essay that I linked to you really is good advice.
 * There's a slang phrase--I'm not sure whether it's an Americanism, an Internet thing, or a combination of the two--of asking a person "Are you mad?", often shortened to "umad?" or "u mad bro?". This phrase is used as a trolling technique, to goad people who are angry into being even more angry. In that context, can you see how many of your statements, which could be boiled down to "u mad bro?", would be perceived as not just annoying but deliberately so? (Cf. "Are you having a bad day?", "Why would you (try to) throw fuel on an ex-fire that has been extinguished already?", "you seem to be still mad about this.", etc.)
 * And most of your questions would be obvious to an experienced user--which Drmies is, and you know he is, and he knows you know--so asking so many obvious questions reads like a backhanded way to insult Drmies by suggesting that he doesn't know. That's why it reads as condescending. Like, I'm explaining all this to you because you seem to genuinely not understand why Drmies reacted so strongly. I hope I'm not just talking about obvious stuff you already know, but if I am, if you're reading all this, getting annoyed at how trite it is, and saying to yourself, "of course I know this, what kind of idiot do you take me for?"...well, that's how Drmies read your post, and how I probably would've read it had it been addressed to me. So that's why.
 * So, in conclusion, I think it's best to just let this drop. You might not have meant to provoke Drmies into an intemperate reaction, but it's really not surprising that your words had that effect. And besides, having read the RfA nonsense that started this (and being a retired bureaucrat myself, for whatever that's worth), I can tell you that this is a complete non-issue--this is not a hill that anyone needs to die on. It's not worth bringing up and creating bad blood about so just let it go. Just my 2 cents, Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 23:00, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Ha, I wish I was that evil, that would make my life much easier; if I didn't care so much I would be a very rich and much happier potato! I know its a complete non-issue because I expect crats to give each vote the weight it deserves. I assume you've read the ANI (and/or my userpage (NSFW, but highly recommended for those who want to understand who I am) ) so you know that I try to defend those who have differing opinions/are a minority (whether they express themselves in ways not everyone appreciates or not), even when I vote support and they vote oppose. To be honest I thought his reaction is, as Spock would say, highly illogical (but your explanation makes sense and I appreciate it). In my native language I am capable of expressing myself in many different ways, which enables me to chose the exact right nuance for each situation. In English my vocabulary is far more limited (which is why I used the word "ex-fire", I couldn't figure out what you guys would call that), which is a relatively small problem, but a bigger problem is that it is far more difficult for me to be diplomatic without using stupid platitudes (some examples follow ). Drmies is obviously a good faith editor, we are on the same team, and I agree with at least 97% of his edits, but recently he made a series of stupid mistakes. It is unfortunate that we can't talk about that, but given the circumstances I agree it is probably best to ignore it. If he ever wants to talk to me about it he is of course welcome to ping me, but that is extremely unlikely to happen because I would quickly steer the conversation in the direction of stuff he doesn't want to talk about: his behaviour. I assume that he also follows your talkpage, reading this comment may help him understand that we are not enemies. Maybe you can convince him to stop misrepresenting my comment (and maybe delete that entire section, which seemed like a reasonable compromise to me), but if he doesn't want to then so be it. I think that communicating in text over the internet adds complications, communicating verbally makes it much easier to understand eachother and body language and other types of non-verbal communication are really important to me; maybe talkpages will turn into videoconferencing pages in the future. Thanks again for your help (and sorry to waste your time with this BS); I think Drmies and myself can agree that you have been very helpful. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 00:02, 24 May 2016 (UTC) p.s. (added in a minor edit) What word(s) would you use to say "ex-fire"?


 * Your most recent comment was a disappointment, but your intentions are good and that is what matters. I am gonna do something else for a while, Wikipedia is depressing. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 16:29, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, there is plenty of disappointment to go around in this situation. I'm glad to hear you're gonna go do something else for now; have fun with it. See you when you get back. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:32, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
 * True, thanks again. Totally ignoring that BS (even when someone tries to create more drama) is a good idea, even though it has downsides (like all good ideas). I´m just gonna assume that if you would read it all that you would agree with me (you seem saner than most), but of course I understand that no one wants to read all that BS. Now it is time to watch TV. Have a nice day, The Quixotic Potato (talk) 16:33, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

@The Quixotic Potato: Okay, I'm replying to this against my better judgement, because what we really need is to not pay attention to this issue any longer. But I don't really want to let this pass without comment, either. While I agree with most of the other commenters that AR's original oppose was frivolous and added nothing of value to the RfA, I would generally agree with your opinion that it shouldn't be stricken, yes. It wasn't going to change the result of the RfA (other than to make it non-unanimous, which doesn't change anything), so it doesn't matter enough to strike. However, and this is a huge however, whether I agree with you, and more generally whether you were "right", is not the point. You don't get to edit-war with people and generally cause trouble even if you are right. A moment's reflection should tell you why this is true--literally everyone who gets into a dispute onwiki believes that they're correct, and so if being correct gave one license to edit-war, etc., we would see nothing but edit-warring from now until the end of time. From the way you frame things, it seems like you're justifying everything you're doing based on the "fact" that you're right and everyone else is wrong. Well, first of all, don't be so sure that you are. You imply that people who disagree with you are insane--I know that's not really what you mean, but the point is that you're assuming that everyone who is being reasonable is going to come to the same conclusion you've reached, that yours is the only reasonable opinion. That's just not true, and it's an exceedingly dangerous mode of thought to be in. "Reasonable minds can differ"; yours is not the only valid opinion, and this situation is a function of opinion, not of objective rightness or wrongness. Now, as I said, I at least partially agree with you, but again, being right still doesn't give you leave to disrupt the encyclopedia. Part of working on a collaborative endeavor is knowing when to compromise, especially when the overall issue is pretty much meaningless. You did the opposite of that, and that's not good. My post to you wasn't motivated by whether I agreed with you or not; whether I did or not was totally irrelevant at that point. All I care about is stopping the needless arguing and drama over a completely pointless thing, and from what I've seen, it was your need to get the last word in (by making a similarly-worded oppose that you knew firsthand was going to start trouble, by telling people how they should feel stupid--and on what planet is telling people that they should feel stupid going to de-escalate anything?, etc.) that kept perpetuating the drama. My advice to you was to just let it go, and instead you did the opposite by inflaming people even more. If you had just stopped talking, you would have gotten the de-escalation you claimed to be seeking, but instead, you escalated the situation even more. That's not cool. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 11:49, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comment. It deserves a response but that will take a while; hope you don't mind. I am in the unfortunate situation that my customers set my deadlines. The Quixotic Potato (talk) 22:47, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Not at all; take as much time as you need. Don't feel obligated to reply at all; do it on your own time. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 22:52, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Mass rollback?
Hi Writ -- is the mass rollback tool down? I've used it twice today with no success. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:54, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I suppose it's possible. I know there were a bunch of changes to rollback recently--details on VPT--and I suppose they could be affecting mass rollback the same way they affect other scripts. I'll look into it. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:12, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yup, looks like BU Rob13 has already reported my script as one of the many broken by this change (thanks, Rob!). I also see that Elitre says a dev is on it (thanks, Elitre and unnamed dev!) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812;
 * @Cyphoidbomb:@BU Rob13: I've made a fix to my script, and it seems to be working now. @Elitre (WMF): Is this because of the fix I made (my script was scavenging the rollback token from the rollback URL on the page, but I changed it to actually query the API for it, since I assume the change to POST removed the rollback token from the URL), because of the reversion of the changes in the code, or both? Who should I talk to for more information about future-proofing my script? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 18:45, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I think User:Krinkle would know. Have a nice weekend everyone, --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 18:46, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * See conversation on my talk page as well. Issue is resolved now. @Writ Keeper: In this case your change fixed it! The code reversion would've also fixed it (by making the old code work again), however the code revert is not yet applied to en.wikipedia.org. This will happen in a few minutes. Krinkle (talk) 19:45, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks all for your hard work! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:18, 27 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey again, I notice that the option to use Mass Rollback is no longer available as a pulldown. I'm using Chrome. I've tried CTRL-F5-ing, but nuthin'. Thoughts? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:14, 29 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Bleh, a stray curly brace. Should be good now, Cyphoidbomb. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 05:32, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks mate. Hate to be the one to keep hounding you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:44, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Nah, no worries; happy to do it. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:20, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

My block
Apparently I've been blocked for "disruptive editing", after tagging those attack pages. 88.87.72.72 (talk) 05:57, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Hm, well, it looks like Coffee has already unblocked you with the summary "mishap", so I'm guessing it was a mistake on their part? Your editing was certainly not disruptive. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 05:59, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, my apologies... It was a knee-jerk reaction to being pinged on IRC with a link to their contributions and seeing that many userpages being edited. It's very rare for someone to be constructively speed editing userpages. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 06:04, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/The Nightingale (2015 novel) at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with db-g7, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 13:31, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

DYK for The Nightingale (2015 novel)
The DYK project (nominate) 12:01, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you
I wanted to thank you for both closing the heated discussion regarding User:98.204.228.159 and suggesting we read WP:CALMDOWN. While I still support my asking for a block (He was being rather rude.), I realize that we were "dog-piling" on him and not being very helpful at all. Thank you for closing what was turning into a baseless back-and-forth argument that was getting nowhere. -- Gestrid (talk) 05:31, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure. Like I said above, I can't really argue with the block; it was justified. But that doesn't help the feeling that this could've been better managed by all of us. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 06:06, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Very true. We could all learn to be a bit more civil sometimes. -- Gestrid (talk) 06:12, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * As for the essay, you'd have to thank Bish, of course; it's never really a happy occasion when I link to it, but I am glad it exists. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 06:16, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

98.204.228.159
I've blocked for one month. They're just continuing and escalating the pattern that's gotten them blocked twice already. Happy to discuss if you want. --Neil N  talk to me 23:17, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
 * @NeilN: They weren't the only one escalating, but I can't really argue the block. What frustrates me about this is that this is pretty much what *ahem* other experienced editors more-or-less get away with. Of course, maybe it's that end of things that's wrong rather than this, but the inequity bothers me.
 * What also bothers me is the dogpile mentality that many people have, and which was on full display here. It's obviously most prevalent at ANI, but it's visible even at places like the Teahouse too, and it's been a feature of Wikipedia for as long as I've been here. Everyone has an opinion or suggestion or whatever, and everyone has to express it, no matter how many people have already spoken and be damned the consequences. Is it any surprise newbies feel ganged up, when they get pounced on by a posse? This IP in particular might not be a good case study--like I said, I can't really contest the block--but how many other, more innocent editors have felt the same way and just left rather than deal with it? It's this kind of thing that gives ANI a bad name, and has people talk derisively about admin wannabes; it seems like people respond to these sorts of situations to prove their own intelligence/savvy/whatever, rather than to actually help the situation. (Not naming names, of course.) I know it's a cliche, but this shit isn't a game; people take this seriously, as much as I wish they wouldn't. We need to put them over our own vanity.
 * also, for real, people, read WP:CALMDOWN. Telling someone to calm down has never worked, and will never work. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 01:27, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I hear you but since this is a consensus-driven site, people will always put their two cents in to "strengthen consensus". The IP started off with a groundless beef (not the first time) and refused to understand why an unsourced edit request was rejected and an edit request with sources was accepted. Instead of learning how "please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made." could be met, they had a tantrum. We really don't need our enthusiastic helpful new contributors (Music1201 started in March) to be told "You really suck at what you do." followed up by "You were wrong, and someone else made the request the next day. NExt time, just honor the fucking request. Got it?" for properly following our policies. If they don't get robust support from other editors, "to hell with this, I'm leaving" is a valid reaction. As you said, this IP is not a good case study, but in these types of instances, I don't think it's unreasonable for editors to "protect" one of their own from uncivilly attacked. --Neil N  talk to me 02:04, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I get that instinct, and it's of course seldom so simply self-centered as I put it above. But consider the scare quotes you used around "protect": how much of this really protects other editors? Does it really have any positive effect? It might on occasion, but not very often, I don't think. It seems to me like someone coming across a new article with an obviously properly-tagged A1 speedy deletion tag, and they decide to throw on some A7 and G2 tags or something on it for good measure, with Twinkle automatically spamming the author's page per usual. It's theoretically possible that it might help the article get deleted faster, but most of the time, it'll be deleted at exactly the same time; the only real effects are that the drive-by tagger gets to smugly throw one more article on their CSD log, and the author is even more dissuaded from continuing to contribute, since they just got triple-tag-bombed. That's what this looks like to me. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 06:13, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not exactly sure why I have your Talk page on my watchlist, but I'm reminded of a piece of advice I read once. "Before you say anything, ask yourself the following three questions: Does this need to be said? Does this need to be said by me? Does this need to be said by me right now?" I think noticeboard threads would go a lot smoother if everyone minded that advice. -- Laser brain  (talk)  13:22, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

What makes you say this isn't an attack? It's obviously him throwing his toys out of his pram again. Adam9007 (talk) 21:00, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * That doesn't mean we delete it. That may be an attack, but that doesn't make it an attack page worthy of G10. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:17, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd be very surprised if it doesn't get deleted G10 if it's posted in article space. Adam9007 (talk) 21:29, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, of course, but article space is different. It's not doing any harm in their own talk page. You only see it if you go out of your way to find it. Article space is our most restrictive namespace, in terms of allowable pages; trying to use article space as a bar to delete pages in other namespaces is not a good way to go about it. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:36, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * It's just that I was under the impression that attacks are not tolerated wherever they're posted? Adam9007 (talk) 21:43, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, first of all, personal attacks are not tolerated. This is not a personal attack, because no persons were named. Whether it's even an attack at all is debatable; one could characterize it as a general, though strongly-worded, criticism of Wikipedia and the way its community operates, and it wouldn't even be an unjustified criticism. But even if it is an attack, that doesn't mean we have to delete the page. Not all attacks need to be removed, much less deleted altogether. And again, we try not to delete user talk pages unless there's a real need to do so. There's no need here. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:48, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I've retagged that page for WP:SPEEDY as a violation of WP:CSD because he created the user (which was later blocked for block evasion) and then created that page during block evasion. -- Gestrid (talk) 21:27, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, and I'm tempted to decline that, too, but whatever, I don't have the energy to keep going. Why are you all still involving yourselves? The talk page as it is is completely harmless, it doesn't even name names; what is with the urgency to delete it, or even do anything about it? Why can't we just let sleeping dogs lie? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:36, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I actually wasn't originally involved, but I saw the discussion in ANI and got involved that way. Plus, that page (in my opinion) is in violation of the block, as account creation was blocked from the original IP address, which (in my opinion) makes it eligible for speedy deletion. -- Gestrid (talk) 22:06, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, you're certainly correct to tag it as G5, policy-wise. Definitely a page made by a block-evading sock. That's why I decided not to decline it--the tag is technically correct, you're perfectly within your rights to tag it, and any admin that comes along would be perfectly within their rights to delete it.
 * But just because we can, just because it's allowed by policy, doesn't mean it's the best thing to do. I mean, this whole thing, the whole series of events that led us to this, is a series of people just not leaving well enough alone: first with the IP editor not just accepting the outcome of the edit request, then with everyone else dogpiling onto them. At some point, one or the other of us needs to just call it quits, and given that this one post on a user's talk page is harmless--especially since the user in question is blocked--this seems like a good place for us to do so. And I don't mean to single you out specifically, by the way, either here or in my post above. It's just the way we all tend to operate, and a lot of the time, it's not a great way. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 22:26, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

It's been four years, today.
Wishing Writ Keeper a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Chris Troutman ( talk ) 14:29, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Two-Factor Authentication now available for admins
Hello,

Please note that TOTP based two-factor authentication is now available for all administrators. In light of the recent compromised accounts, you are encouraged to add this additional layer of security to your account. It may be enabled on your preferences page in the "User profile" tab under the "Basic information" section. For basic instructions on how to enable two-factor authentication, please see the developing help page for additional information. Important: Be sure to record the two-factor authentication key and the single use keys. If you lose your two factor authentication and do not have the keys, it's possible that your account will not be recoverable. Furthermore, you are encouraged to utilize a unique password and two-factor authentication for the email account associated with your Wikimedia account. This measure will assist in safeguarding your account from malicious password resets. Comments, questions, and concerns may be directed to the thread on the administrators' noticeboard. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Well I'll be damned
That's a pleasant surprise. Good luck. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:33, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Someone told me recently that I should; my initial reaction was "haha no", but then I thought about it and thought "eh why not". Hence my statement. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 18:37, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Haha, I am Bishonen the Kingmaker! Doug Weller blamed me entirely for making him run two years ago (wasn't it?), and then he got the most votes of all that year. That's what happens if you listen to me, I bring luck and popularity. I think I'll just go and poke a few more select people. There's a non-admin I have in mind... hmmm... yes, I'll just head over to their page. Bishonen &#124; talk 18:47, 14 November 2016 (UTC).


 * (e/c) Well, I would have, except you made it fairly clear last year it would be a waste of time. Glad you changed your mind. Clue is much more useful to an Arb than being willing to Take It All Very Seriously. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:49, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I for one, was most impressed by your nomination statement. --kelapstick(bainuu) 10:10, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

A new user right for New Page Patrollers
Hi.

A new user group, New Page Reviewer, has been created in a move to greatly improve the standard of new page patrolling. The user right can be granted by any admin at PERM. It is highly recommended that admins look beyond the simple numerical threshold and satisfy themselves that the candidates have the required skills of communication and an advanced knowledge of notability and deletion. Admins are automatically included in this user right.

It is anticipated that this user right will significantly reduce the work load of admins who patrol the performance of the patrollers. However,due to the complexity of the rollout, some rights may have been accorded that may later need to be withdrawn, so some help will still be needed to some extent when discovering wrongly applied deletion tags or inappropriate pages that escape the attention of less experienced reviewers, and above all, hasty and bitey tagging for maintenance. User warnings are available here but very often a friendly custom message works best.

If you have any questions about this user right, don't hesitate to join us at WT:NPR. (Sent to all admins) .MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:48, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

 * Arbcom? What is this "Arbcom"? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 23:37, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Lexi Lawson Article Changes
Thank you for declining the deletion of Lexi Lawson and recognizing the originality of the article despite the unfortunate coincidental plagiarism. I saw that you suggested the article had "tonal problems" and was wondering if you could specify the changes you would like me to make. I would love to improve this article in any way you suggest. Thanks again! (MonroeHarless (talk) 18:25, 8 December 2016 (UTC))
 * @MonroeHarless: I've actually already made some changes, removing some of the more cruft-y things. Incidentally, some of the writing is much too close to the wording of the sources--close paraphrasing is not acceptable the same way actual copy-pasting is. You have to do more than just change a sentence from first- to third-person and glue some others together. Common mistake to make, but just keep an eye out for it.
 * As for the rest of the article, honestly I'm a bit reluctant to go into more detail, simply because I don't think the article will survive the AfD. There just aren't enough independent, reliable sources that I can find to justify notability. I wouldn't want to tell you to spend even more effort on something that I think is doomed to deletion. Right now, the best thing you can do is find new reliable sources that talk about Lawson in depth but are independent of the productions she makes. Things like magazine or newspaper articles; playbill entries and the like won't cut it. That's what the crux of the AfD debate is going to be about.
 * I'm sorry to give you bad news, but that's just how it is; notability is a tricky thing, and if an article doesn't have enough sources to be viable, it doesn't get to stay. Good luck, Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:04, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

User:Scottm26/sandbox
Hi,

I see you deleted User:Scottm26/sandbox as WP:G2, but G2 specifically excludes the user name space. -- Whpq (talk) 19:22, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * @Whpq: You're right, but the reason I actually deleted it was somewhat different: it was created by a user other than Scottm26., in fact. The page definitely should've been deleted; there just isn't really a criterion for it, so I just went with G2, since it's what the page was tagged with. I suppose G3 might've been a better sell. Still, mea culpa. If you like, please feel free to check my work with any other admin; I stand by my decision, but I'd be happy to consider whatever suggestion you or they have. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The history isn't visible for me so I don't know who created it, but my recollection is that it appeared to have been yet another attempt at a fantasy Big Brother page so WP:U5 would have been the better choice. The really curious thing though is how Cosmic321wikia found his way there and tagged it as essentially their only contribution to Wikipedia. -- Whpq (talk) 19:54, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, good call, U5 would've been the best. It's one of the newer CSDs, so I tend to forget about it. Thanks! And yeah, it is weird. Nothing in particular to go on though, so it just is what it is I guess. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Ha, thanks! This is actually the first barnstar I've gotten in a long time. Like I say, writing scripts like this is probably my favorite thing to do on Wikipedia. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, you deserve it. It might be a little script, but 1. I wouldn't have been able to write it (or maybe I'd have been able to, but certainly I don't trust myself enough in those things to actually try in case I mess something up) and 2. it's going to save me hundreds of clicks in checking taxonomy-related lists for duplicates-through-redirecting-synonyms, moving categorization that should go on species-level redirects but are on monotypic genus articles, when redirect-tagging redirects, when technical-moving pages to the proper location... So yeah, that's pretty awesome, and you're pretty awesome for not merely being able, nor even able and (grumblingly) willing, but actually happy to write scripts for folks just 'cause they were wondering if there was a way to do something. :) AddWittyNameHere (talk) 21:12, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom election
I blame Russia. Sorry pal. Drmies (talk) 23:07, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Me too. A certain old English ballad comes to mind for some reason. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:10, 15 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Probably for the best. Finishing dead last is a wee bit ignominious, I'll admit, but y'know, them's the breaks when you have a three-word statement. Besides, it is true that I haven't been all that active recently. Can't complain. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 23:11, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for trying to help Wikipedia by running. Lakeshake (talk) 00:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC)


 * In my experience, a 10 word statement is the minimum acceptable to the voting public. Try that next time. Anyway, sad for us, happy for you. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:02, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Ah, I see the witty people got here first :-) I wanted to counteract at least one of the folks who got sniffy about your self-nomination statement; I thought it was à propos for someone offering to do such a thankless task. I had thought of asking you a question: my memory is declining, but weren't you the one who got us out of at least one pickle with WMF high-handedness; perhaps you were the one who put together a replacement for the OBOD when the WMF forgot that unregistered editors need to know when there are messages on their talk pages (like warnings of impending DOOOOM) and couldn't be bothered to fix it until after tiffin on the next working day? I may well be misremembering, but if so, thank you again, and damnit, we need that kind of attitude on Arbcom. And if not, just chalk it up to my advancing age. Anyway, I'm sorry you escaped from 2 years of horrendous drudgery. Yngvadottir (talk) 17:30, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, your memory's correct, I did write a script to restore the OBoD back in the day, when the WMF first removed it. But as always, I can't take full credit for sticking it to The Man, as the reality was much more complicated (allowing that my memory, too, has gotten a little soft on the specifics of that situation). Basically, I was still working on the script, iterating on versions of it, and either it was made a default, on-for-everyone gadget or people were talking about doing that, without my approval. And I don't mean that in a possessive way, I mean that in a "this code isn't ready for primetime yet" way. It hadn't been particularly peer-reviewed, and it wasn't as efficient as it could or should have been. I don't know that people realize how powerful (and dangerous!) user scripts can be in the wrong hands, but they are *not* the kind of thing that we can just willy-nilly impose on everyone. The major problems with removing the OBoD--notably, that it left IP editors without any notification of a talk page message--were caused by (I can only assume) rushing it into production without properly testing and QAing it; and in this case, like most certainly does not cure like. It's important to fix bugs, and if the community can do so, it should, and I obviously fully support the community doing so without say-so from the WMF if necessary (there have been similar situations to that one since then, where I've said the same). But doing a hasty deployment of code to fix another hasty deployment of code only perpetuates the root of the problem. I'll admit, though, that it was a bit flattering for people to have trusted me enough to do that back then Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 18:30, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:55, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
 * :D three years already? Thanks, Gerda. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 09:57, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Here We Come A-wassailing
Merry Christmas! Better not open the box! The Bishonen Conglomerate talk 11:55, 23 December 2016 (UTC).

RefTools
WK, help me out please. I NEED MY CITE BUTTON BACK! By now I've tried all the RefTools bars, and I've asked folks like [User:PrimeHunter]] for advice, and by now I almost have RefToolbar 2.0b, all but the damn cite button, which is the ONLY button from any of those toolbars I ever need. I have Windows, this version or that (7?) on different computers, and Firefox 50. And a Prius of course, and a Bosch dishwasher. Drmies (talk) 03:12, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Prius? Tesla or no sale. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 03:51, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
 * OK then. I'll ask a smart person. Drmies (talk) 03:52, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Edits made to your scripts
Hi Writ, not sure what the convention is when it comes to editing other people's user scripts (probably: don't) but per these post-move issues I've made these two minor edits. I've replaced instances of  with   -- Samtar talk &middot; contribs 11:14, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think there is an official convention. My unofficial convention is please don't, but in this case, it's totally fine. Been a bit busy with other things, lately; I saw the ping on the talk page about the move, but hadn't had a chance to get on and fix it yet. Thanks! Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 17:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

It works!
Long time no see.

Remember that script you helped me on?

(The one for hiding/showing list item annotations).

I've got the thing working. It hides annotations, using a toggle switch, and preserves the status of the toggle across pages.

I'd be honored if you would take a look at it and tell me what you think. The Transhumanist 02:27, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

P.S.: Of course, it's not done yet. I'm continuing to improve it. The current feature I'm trying to add is restoring the viewport position relative to its content, after each time the toggle is activated. I've posted a thread over at VPT. -TT
 * Don't have a tremendous amount of time at the moment, but probably something to do with scrollTop. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 04:19, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll look into it. The Transhumanist 10:30, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

ANI
Best close I've seen in a while. Very apt! Tony Fox (arf!) 03:42, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I aim to please. :D Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 09:23, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news
 * A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
 * Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
 * Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news
 * When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
 * Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
 * The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration
 * The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries
 * JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks again!
I know you don't appear to currently be around, going by your contributions, but I figured I'd thank you again for that custom little no-auto-following redirects userscript you wrote up for me. Without exaggerating: it's saved me slightly over 3100 clicks in the past eight hours alone. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 01:35, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Haha, my pleasure! I'm still around, more or less, but I'm actually editing from IPs more often than not, just because I'm usually too lazy to do the 2FA thing. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 09:35, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, makes sense, though as EFM+sysop, 2FA also makes sense in your case. XD Hope that although lazy, you're (otherwise) doing well? In any case, the script is proving very useful and considering I actually was muttering under my breath about how ridiculously much more work I'd be having without it (I'd near-double my clicks on redir-tagging, for once, which'd come down to several thousand clicks a week at current pace, but now that I'm also converting deprecated redr to rcat shell...ouch. I'd end up with carpal tunnel syndrome in a week, methinks), I figured it was about time to re-thank you for it. :) AddWittyNameHere (talk) 09:43, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, yeah, 2FA is definitely a thing my account should have. But yeah, other than sloth, I'm doin' fine, thanks for asking. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 17:41, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Glad to hear so. :) AddWittyNameHere (talk) 17:52, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Why you deleted my Sandbox?
GiGatR00n (talk) 09:37, 6 April 2017 (UTC)Why you delete my Sandbox article GiGatR00n? You need to learn something about Sandbox:

"This is the user sandbox of GiGatR00n. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user and is not an encyclopedia article"

Now you must know this is only my testing spot and it was NOT my final article. I was writing my article but a guy Kleuske placed a tag to delete my Sandbox article!!! but why? was it the final article? did you read my article before deletion? I bet NO. all you did was delete my Sandbox article without any investigation about its contents.

All people knows even TERRORISTS such as ISIS that the Wikipedia is mixed of Advertisements and Promotional contents. you need samples? take a look here: notepad++, Dashlane, FortNotes, KeePass, KeePassX, Keychain (software), KYPS, LastPass and hundreds of contents

There's no difference between what you did about my article and what a dictator do against other ppl. that's a shame. YOU Writ Keeper and this guy Kleuske CAN CONTINUE DELETING OTHER PEOPLE'S ARTICLES BUT THEIR SANDBOX ARTICLES.
 * FYI, GiGatR00n has been indeffed by Yunshui per spamublock. De728631 (talk) 13:09, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Sixty percent of the time, Yunshui's got my back every time. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 18:52, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Realtyww Info
Hello! You've deleted my page Realtyww Info

I'm new to Цikipedia and I've tried my best to join editors

This is my first post and now it is deleted

I've read all those links provided but can't determine what exactly is wrong with it

Can you please guide me how to fix it and restore?

I have many ideas in mind regarding new content for wiki, but there is nobody to ask how exactly to do this

Help me please

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by SergeySuhar (talk • contribs) 15:14, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, Sergey. The biggest problem with your article was a lack of independent, reliable sources that cover the subject in depth. You see, the point of Wikipedia is not to cover all possible subjects; rather, we attempt to cover only those subjects which we can write about verifiably. One of the most important ways we determine whether a subject is notable or not is whether there are sources from which we can draw verifiable information to write about; this is the core of the general notability guideline, which reads: If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list.. If an article doesn't have reliable sources, then we have nowhere to pull verifiable information from; we don't have anything to put in the article and so the article shouldn't exist.
 * You're probably thinking that your article did have references--after all, you added many inline citations. But here's the thing: none of those sources qualify under the GNG guideline. Nearly all of them were authored by realtyww's creator, Alexander Zhuchenko. Thus, they fail the independent part of the GNG test, because the sources cited are not independent of the article's subject. There were four citations that were not authored by Zhuchenko: one was a PR release, which also fails the independence test, and the other three were entries on web traffic monitors like Alexa. These three citations do pass the independence test, since they weren't authored by anyone with a direct connection to the subject, but they fail the significant coverage test; none of those three actually discuss the subject of the article in any detail, since they're just generic entries on traffic monitoring sites.
 * So, the end result is that, to fix these problems, you first need to find multiple sources that are reliable, independent, and significant enough to provide us with enough verifiable information to make an article from. If those sources don't exist, then neither should the Wikipedia article, I'm afraid. Also, I don't want to make too many assumptions, but if you work for realtyww, keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a place for advertising or promotion; we strive to be a neutral encyclopedia. You should take a look at our policies on editing with conflicts of interest if so. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:35, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

What I was doing at NeilN's talk
His listing at CAT:REVDEL combined with previous positive experiences meant he was always my go-to for RevDel. So congratulations, you just added yourself to the list of people I'm going to annoy whenever I need something vaporized. City O f Silver  16:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Haha, all according to plan. ;) I actually used to be listed in that category too; I took myself out at some point and forgot to re-add myself. I'll fix that presently. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:47, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

massrollback.js
Hi, i've got some changes for mass rollback that I'd like you to consider. Beware that I have not tested them, since I don't often run rollbacks, but maybe you can help out with that. The benefit to these changes is that they use the mediawiki api module, which does automatic fetching and refreshing of tokens if required. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 13:05, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @TheDJ: That looks interesting, thanks. Is it all right for the script to repeatedly call  on the same page? It shouldn't be a common case, but if the rollback button is repeatedly called and then canceled, your changes will have the script try to load that dependency multiple times. I'd imagine this is okay, but not sure myself. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:12, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Seems to work, thanks! Always good to handle tokens more elegantly, kinda hate dealing with em. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's intentional, this is a preloading strategy. mw.loader.load is just a trigger to start loading resources, the other is mw.loader.using, which loads AND returns a promise, so that code can wait to be executed within the right context. This strategy can be used to optimise. On the one hand, you don't want the 'prompt' to have to wait for a script resource that might not yet be present, but at the same time, it's wasteful to have to wait for a resource after the user has finished the prompt. This way, we start loading when we pretty much know for sure we need the module, but just in case the user is REALLY quick, we 'guard' with the using block to ensure the dependency has finished loading. And yes you can load a module as often as you want, Resourceloader will optimise for you. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 13:24, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Good to know, thanks. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:27, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

ANI
When I said I would drop it I mean commenting further not the complaint. I did not ask for the ANI to be closed.Slatersteven (talk) 14:27, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Slatersteven: *sigh* Well, you are free to revert my close if you like, but I bet nothing good will come of it. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I tend not to reverts ANI threads (I am not even sure I am alloyed to). I just wanted to inform you I has not asked for it to be closed. Your action was premature and seemed to be based (ironically) on a mis-understanding of what I wrote.Slatersteven (talk) 14:33, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Also I note that it has been edited, after the close.Slatersteven (talk) 14:35, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @Slatersteven: You are allowed to re-open thread closes if you think they're premature. Even if you're not normally allowed, in this case, I explicitly give you my permission to revert my close and re-open the thread if you think it's a good idea. But while I will admit that I misread your comment, I don't think the close was premature. That thread is going nowhere, and fast. While I reiterate that you're welcome to re-open it, I stand by my assertion that nothing good will come of it if you do. (Which is not a threat, by the way; I do not take umbrage to people reverting my closes or anything, and I don't plan on taking any more admin or quasi-admin actions related to this matter. Just a prediction based on how these things usually go.) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:38, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * And what of the edit made after the close, one that (by the way) is lying?Slatersteven (talk) 14:42, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * *shrug* It happens sometimes that people don't notice the close, or the close happens between when they clicked the edit link and when they hit submit. The edit conflict detector is tuned for article edits, not threaded discussions. I usually just let it go. But you do you. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:45, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * a waste of a couple perfectly decent jokes, though
 * Well I just had an edit conflict come up, but fair enough if you do not see this as an issue why should i.Slatersteven (talk) 14:54, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * a waste of a couple perfectly decent jokes, though I actually came here to address that with some strategic lyrics but I suspect I should just leave this link and go. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants   Tell me all about it.  15:07, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Easyblock.js
Hi, User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/easyBlock.js is not really up to date with current coding standards. would be wonderful if you can make it not crash :) —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 19:13, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Y'know, I don't even know where all these scripts came from. other than, y'know, that i wrote them Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:15, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

autoCloser.js
Hi there. I noticed that after adding your autoCloser.js script to my skin.js, User:Evad37/XFDcloser.js no longer worked (your script's "Close Section" replaced its buttons). I'm not sure whether this is a problem with your script or Evad37's, so I wanted to inform you and am pinging. Regards  So Why  13:07, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Honestly, that's a script I made at someone else's request (don't even remember who), and it's not something I ever felt that much enthusiasm for, so it's probably pretty out-of-date. I'm surprised it works at all. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:15, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm not convinced that it does. Do you have a use for this script? I think it needs a full rewrite, which I'm not really opposed to doing necessarily, but if there's no desire for it, I might just scrap it. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:29, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I thought the possibility to close sections easily quite useful but I'm sure I can keep on living with adding the tags manually. I just found the script today anyway. Regards  So Why  14:32, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * @SoWhy: Okay, I've reworked the script a bit; it should be working on my end at least. I haven't investigated why it might be interfering with Evad37's script yet, but it should do its job at least. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 17:04, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I've had a look, and got mixed results – only one script would work, depending on which the script that was loaded first by the browser. I've fixed XFDcloser's problem when autoCloser is loaded first, but autoCloser still has a problem if XFDcloser loads first (even on non-XfD project/project_talk pages, where effectively all XFDcloser does is log an entry in the browser's console). - Evad37 &#91;talk] 04:24, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

(very) non-urgent help request for TPSes
Hey, all, looking for people to help me test a new user script. See User:Writ Keeper/blackjack for details. ;) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:35, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
 * now with splits! nobody expects the banana
 * Odd looking script - are you starting up an online casino as a sideline? Admin wages here not enough for you? Yunshui 雲 水 13:40, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Haha, I wish. Client-side Javascript/HTML/CSS is not the format to write an online casino in--at least one that's not going to lose you all your money from cheating. This was just a fun (for me, at least) project to fill some idle time. Kinda pleased with how it came out, actually. and yeah, yeah, i know that just because wp:not doesn't have an entry for an online casino doesn't mean wp is one. don't take this from me, okay? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:48, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Does it need to be installed in my .js page to work? At the moment I'm just seeing a green screen with four "Loading" tabs... Yunshui <sup style="font-size:90%">雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 13:57, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Yup, you need to add the following two lines to the .js page of your choice:
 * Well, you just lost me £500 and got me started on a gambling habit that will probably bankrupt me and leave my children destitute on the streets. I'm off to Ladbrokes, hope you're happy. Yunshui <sup style="font-size:90%">雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 14:12, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
 * And another gambler....this is why I shouldn't live 20 miles from 2 casinos. &mdash; JJ Be  rs  14:51, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

For those keeping track at home (all none of you), it should now properly simulate an actual deck of cards. It uses six decks, shuffling between deals once 50% of the deck has been used. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:26, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Now with a status bar so that you can see roughly how far into the deck you are. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:41, 15 May 2017 (UTC)