User talk:Writ Keeper/Archives/15

Uhh...
You forgot to to block, which is another obvious sock. &mdash; JJ Be  rs  14:41, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

≠== Creation of page garry walia ==

Hi writ keeper This discussion is created in regard to an Indian journalist namely Garry Walia. The recreation of the page is banned by you. since significant new information has come to light after a deletion that justify recreation of the deleted page. I request that it should be allowed and the page may kindly be recreated again

Almasmano (talk) 19:36, 18 May 2017 (UTC)


 * No, I don't think directly unprotecting it is a good idea. It's been recreated too many times with no improvements whatsoever from the version that was deleted at AfD. If you want to create this article, I think it would be better to create it as a draft first, and if it passes a review at Articles for Creation, then I would unprotect it and allow it to be created, though you should know that AfC review can be a very long process, since there are many articles waiting for review and few editors available to perform them. Sorry, but that's just how it is. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:42, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

As you said it was recreated without improvements. Dear writ keeper i created it with references and the information was from a reliable source. You suggested to paste a draft in Articles for creation. The only issuwl is time it takes as u said it takes time. Moreover Let me tell you my dear friend none objected to the article gurpreet garry walia. So it is humbly requested that it may kindly be allowed Almasmano (talk) 20:51, 18 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but my answer remains no. This is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper; there is no rush to cover things in a timely fashion. While the delays inherent in the AfC process can be frustrating, to be sure, they are ultimately not relevant to the encyclopedia. If you must, you can file an appeal at requests for page protection, to get the opinion of an outside admin. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:53, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

I am not good at wikipedia just entered the wikipedia world. Moreover i would be happy if you will allow the new comers to do good things. The sources to my article was very reliable. I wont appeal for an outside admin. Because i just checked you been on wikipedia from 6 years and whatever you will say will be correct. But please check the references to my article. The references was of a national news channel registered with the ministry of information and broadcasting india. So i once again request you to lift the ban. Almasmano (talk) 21:04, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm no more infallible than the next person--indeed, possibly less so--so please appeal if you want to; my reputation and tenure as an editor, such as they are, shouldn't stop you from seeking a second opinion. But I'm afraid my answer stands. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 22:57, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, I was overly generous with my AGF, but you *are* a sock. Sorry for the mixup. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 05:00, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Allyhall
It has been highly requested that you continue to allow work by Allyhall321. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allyhall321 (talk • contribs)
 * You're going to have to be more specific, and not refer to yourself in the third person. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 18:48, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * 'It' still stands strong and can refer to anything, including myself; or yourself, as you put it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allyhall321 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * In that case, you'll be happy to know that I haven't stopped you from editing "anything". You are still free to attempt to improve any Wikipedia article you wish. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:42, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

FYI
The bit you removed from KK's comment was added by them originally. Timothy Joseph Wood 17:27, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * @Timothyjosephwood: Yes, I know; I re-added it to KK87's post. But Namarly also re-added it, in the wrong place: as you can see in your diff, it belongs to the This seriously did not need to blow up like this... comment, but Namarly had re-added it to the The content isn't as big of an issue as your behavior is... post. Appreciate (sincerely) the note, though. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 17:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah. I see. mb. Timothy Joseph Wood  17:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Nah, you're good. The whole situation is confusing enough for anyone. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 17:41, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

edits
hello. This is a wiki. No one person owns any article, and no "opinion" is needed to include the sources fact that this perp was part of that FB club. By the way, that was a problem with my laptop as far as that multiple thing on my part...  Anyway, I'm not edit-warring, I'm restoring sourced referenced facts THAT EDIT-WARRIORS AND SUPPRESSORS KEEP IDIOTICALLY REMOVING, with literally zero sound argument or rationale for it. There's no mention of this sourced fact anywhere in the article. What is going on now is just SUPPRESSION OF FACTS that you don't like to be revealed. He was part of a FB club called "Terminate the Republicans". Nowhere is that mentioned. Restored. Namarly (talk) 16:41, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Why are you telling me? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:41, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Because you're one of the edit-warriors and supppressors who removed source material, for nonsense reasons. I thought was clear. Namarly (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 16:51, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * If you'd slow down and actually look at the edit I made, you'd see my edit summary: m duplicate section, and repeated details. No opinion on whether the FB group should be in the article or not, but when stripped of duplicates, it was the only sentence left, so rm for now. My objection to your edit was that, in addition to repeating the section twice, you also duplicated information that was in the above paragraph; when the para you added was shorn of duplicate info, all that was left was the Facebook group, which, whether it belongs in the article or not, certainly doesn't warrant a separate paragraph entirely on its own. So I removed it, since it was clearly not right as is, expecting that you'd open a talk page discussion on the matter, like you're supposed to, instead of edit warring, and that there would soon be a consensus on whether it belongs or not.
 * tl;dr: Slow the hell down, I'm not your enemy, and neither is anyone else. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:55, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, listen carefully. I did not deliberately remove other people's comment remarks, it was an EDIT CONFLICT ACCIDENT.  But thanks for assuming good faith again.
 * Like I said, you need to slow down. You're responsible for *every part* of your edits; if you keep disrupting the encyclopedia, you're going to get blocked, whether or not you're doing it intentionally. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 17:19, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello.  I did not modify anyone's comments.  That was an edit war conflict accident, not intentional.  Stay off my page please.  Thanks.  Also, don't lecture me with your arrogant sanctimonious idiocy.  This would not have happened if edit-warriors and suppressors did not delete and disrespect valid sourced contributions for flimsy dishonest reasons. There was no "duplicate" of the words "Terminate the Republicans, Facebook club" anywhere in the article. The fault is yours and that [npa|person] Timothy and "Knowledge" and the [npa|people] who don't want this information (lol) revealed.  So pot-kettle-black about "slow down". I didn't run to the notice board like a jerk to get someone in trouble for unfair reasons.   My edit was SOURCED AND TRUE AND VALID..and NOT anywhere else in the article.  So what that "Bernie supporter" was elsewhere. "Terminate the Republicans" was not, and also all of that should be in the PERP section.  So no (not even close) of a valid reason to remove.  I'm not perfect, but you suppressors are the worst here regardless of what any biased Admin might say or do (who might agree with suppression too.)  Regards.  Namarly (talk) 17:28, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for trying Writ. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:30, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, KK87, I'm just doing my best. :/
 * @Namarly: I am fair game, but you do NOT get to insult other editors on my talk page. And before you say it, yes, I'm aware of the irony of modifying your comment after I told you not to do the same. I believe the differing circumstances allow this. If you disagree, let me know and I'll remove the comment entirely instead of redacting part of it, but I will not allow the comment to stand unedited. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 17:40, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * FYI Namarly was blocked for a week by Floquenbeam. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:42, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Writ_Keeper/Scripts/commonHistory.js
Hi, this script was missing it's dependency declaration for mediawiki.api RL module. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 22:19, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Speed Langworthy
Can you restore the content of the the deleted Speed Langworthy to Draft:Speed Langworthy please? —  InsertCleverPhraseHere  00:11, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. It was added to significantly after you tagged it, enough so that deleting it gave me pause; I obviously decided to go ahead with the deletion, but it was a close thing, and I'm sorry if it was over the boundary (though I guess I owe that more to the page creator, hah). Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 00:34, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem, the creator messaged me privately so I decided to draftify it for him and help with sourcing if possible. —  InsertCleverPhraseHere  00:50, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Can you also restore We Men Must Grow a Mustache to Draft:We Men Must Grow a Mustache please? The artist's article now exists, and I am confident that the creator is keen to work on it. —  InsertCleverPhraseHere  04:49, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:58, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

CommonHistory.js
Do you think you could add an "Inspect all diffs" button so it automatically expands all the diffs on the page? It would really be useful especially for BAG related matters. With that in mind, can you add a "Hide all diffs" button as well?— CYBERPOWER  ( Chat ) 13:37, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The reason it didn't have a button like that already was due to API load concerns--it was a feature that was requested to me. But I'll see what I can do; it's probably fine. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:59, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 * @Cyberpower678: I think the question of whether this is feasible or not will come down to the question of how many diffs can I pull in a single API query, which (I think) is the answer to my VPT question. If I can't retrieve a reasonable number of diffs in a single query (say, 50+), then I'll have to spam a bunch of API calls to retrieve all the diffs, and I don't think that's a good idea. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:30, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 * It's either that, or I click each button individual which spams the API with 100s of requests. Maybe you can restrict this to admins or extended confirmed users, but running a sequential number of batch calls to the API seems insignificant VS 100s of single calls.  The API is fast in terms of being able to handle read requests.— CYBERPOWER  (Around ) 20:33, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 * As it turns out, the value is in fact 1, which means in the worst case (and I have to expect the worst case), it would have to make a separate API call for each one anyway. So it's no different in the end. I can remove the lock that keeps it from processing one API call at a time, but I think that's about the best I'm comfortable implementing (once the lock is removed,  in your browser's JS console will have the same effect as clicking all the buttons, but I don't want to endorse that kind of thing by incorporating it into a feature). Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:03, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 * So I would just have to run that function you mentioned above in my console, and it will automatically expand all of the diffs in the page? I can work with that.  I need it for BAG purposes, so obviously restricting to technically competent users makes sense.— CYBERPOWER  (Around ) 22:13, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Massrollback bug
I mass-rollbacked an IP a short time ago and noticed on any articles that have special characters like "é" in the title, such as Taulabé, mass-rollback will not run on them. It happens with any letter with a "line" (not sure what exactly it's called) above it - such as on Jocón also. Home Lander (talk) 03:23, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Haha, the term I think is diacritics. Thanks for the bug report; I'll look into it when I get a chance. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 12:34, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * @Home Lander: K, should be fixed. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:21, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yep, it appears to work now. I moved my sandbox to User:Home Lander/Tést and it successfully rolled back my alt account. Thanks. Home Lander (talk) 18:48, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The fact that you (and maybe 2 dozen other people) occasionally poke your head in is about the only reason I stick around
--Floquenbeam (talk) 22:07, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Haha, I was just kidding, too; I'd drink a beer with you. I'm not the biggest beer person--bourbon and single malt scotch are more my style--but I do dearly love a Left Hand Milk Stout Nitro or a Southern Tier Pumking every now and again. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 22:14, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I prefer Bud Light. (just kidding! please do not block me!) --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:16, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The orange bar script only works intermittently for me
Hey Writ Keeper. First, thanks for creating that script. I still think they should place back the orange bar of doom, but... at least we can place back its functionality. They always say the Internet is addictive. I think there's some pathway in my brain that is tied to getting that new messages notice and provides a tiny serotonin release. I need my orange bar. I digress. The script is working for me sometimes, and sometimes not. I know that in itself is odd. Most things like this: they are either working or broken, there is no in between. Nevertheless, the last message I got on my talk page produced the orange bar, the one before that did not, and that spottiness has been going on for a while now. I believe this started immediately after the update to the interface (when they changed the appearance of the buttons, and related changes [I think on July 19, or within a few days of that date]). It is also possible this has something to do with changes to the interface at my .js and/css files, and so it's just me—so seeing if anyone else has the same issue seems key. Thought I'd let you know though. Best--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:54, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I haven't heard of anyone else having issues with that script, and it still seems to be working for me. I would guess that it's another one of your scripts that is breaking, which halts the loading of the rest of the scripts, and the inconsistency just comes from how far the scripts get in loading before that happens. I'll take a look when I can. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:58, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Right, it is probably just me.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:05, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
 * @Fuhghettaboutit: Okay, so a couple of things: first, you actually have my script defined in two places: once in your common.js, and once in your monobook.js. You should probably remove one of those declarations (I'd imagine keeping the common.js one is easier, but it doesn't really matter.) Second, one of your other scripts is indeed breaking:, defined in your monobook.js page. I'd suggest replacing it with  , which should do pretty much the same thing, but it's linked to a gadget, so it should be kept pretty much up-to-date. I'm not positive that fixing these things will bring your OBoD back, but I *think* they will; let me know if that doesn't work and I'll keep looking. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:22, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Implemented both suggestions. I'll report back.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:34, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

commonHistory.js
Hi - no longer works on watchlist page, but still works on contributions and edit history pages. Is it just me? -- Green  C  03:59, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * No, you're not alone, it's also stopped for me in the last couple days. Still looking into it. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:35, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * @GreenC, Sondra.kinsey: Should be fixed now; the underlying HTML structure of the watchlist must've changed in the last few days. I've adjusted the script to be more tolerant of structural changes, at what should be only a minor cost of efficiency, which should resolve the issue. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 18:30, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick fix! Sondra.kinsey (talk) 18:47, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes working, thanks! I have to say this script has had a big impact on my work (particularly checking through thousands of bot edits for errors), and the system seems incomplete without it. -- Green  C  18:49, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for fixing it quickly – it was only when it stopped working that I realised just how much time it saves, and what a pain it is to be without it. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:07, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Haha, no problem at all! I'm glad y'all find it useful. :) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 00:05, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

I've heard if you say "Writ Keeper" three times, then Writ Keeper will appear to answer questions posed to Writ Keeper, even if he's busy IRL
Let's say someone claims they don't really want to edit a page, but can't seem to resist. Is there a way to use javascript to prevent oneself from editing one particular page? I mean obviously they could just remove whatever it was from their .js page, but I suppose this would at least prevent their instinctive, knee-jerk commenting. (This is not about User:Only, but they will probably be interested in your reply as well, so I'm pinging them.)

This would be voluntary, not something imposed on them. A topic ban at ANI would be easier, and I'm not even sure a technical limitation like this is the best approach. I'm just curious if there even is a technical option. --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:46, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * *appears out of genie bottle* Yyyyyes. It's possible. It would have to be strictly voluntary, though, akin to the Wikibreak Enforcer; it'd be far too easy to evade, even without considering just removing it from their .js. Just disabling Javascript would re-enable editing the page. I can try to whip something up, though, if that still sounds of interest. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:49, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh, also, I make no promises about VisualEditor, since I have no idea how it works. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:54, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Totally vulnerable to removing the script/disabling JS as you said, but I did this though hiding the /  elements (the edit button, non-VE and VE)  -- There'sNoTime (to explain) 13:58, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was the first thing I thought of, but that's not quite optimal, I think. First, just hiding the button doesn't disable the access key (alt-shift-e). Need to remove the  HTML attribute. Second, I don't know that just removing the button is exactly the best approach--I don't know that we want to remove access to viewing the source of the page. Third, going directly to the URL (by adding  ) will bypass that; I know that this is so workaround-able that it's a little silly to worry about that kind of thing, but I'd still rather mess with the edit page itself than just access to it. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:07, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, the section edit buttons. :P Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:33, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Can I hijack your talk page to ask Only if they think it's a good idea? I don't want to propose it to the person I'm thinking about until I know (a) how to do it, and (b) that someone besides me thinks it's a reasonable thing to try before a topic ban. Before you spend any of your time on (a), I'd like to see about (b). --Floquenbeam (talk) 13:55, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm okay with this idea. Based on his comment on his talk page, it seems he wants to be technically prevented from editing that page so this seems like it could be a good step. only (talk) 14:44, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. In that case, WK, whenever you get a chance, if you can whip something up I'd appreciate it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:44, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * @Floquenbeam: @Only: First draft is ready at User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/topicBanEnforcer.js (and yes, it didn't occur to me until afterwards that this only enforces page bans, not topic bans). To install, add the following to your common.js: ; this will institute the ban on my sandbox. In order to change the pages it applies to, you would add or replace the page's name (as it appears in the page's url) into the bannedPageArray, so if I wanted to add User:Writ Keeper/sandbox2, I would change that line like so: , and to remove the page from the banned pages list, I'd just delete it from the array. Test it out and lemme know what you think. It's a bit slow, which is unavoidable in any JS solution, but it might do. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:51, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It works for me in normal human mode. As you suspected, it doesn't work in VE, but that's not really a problem in this case because the page in question is in WP space; if I understand correctly VE can't be used in that space anyway. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:05, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh. If I change the page in my commons.js page to Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, I still get the "edit source" tab.  Not there on your sandbox, but there on ANEW.  Hmm.... hopefully it's me doing something stupid?  --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:11, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Convenience link: . --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:12, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll look at VE anyway. The problem with ANEW (other than a URI encoding bug that I just fixed) is that it's finicky about page names; like I said, the page name has to be exactly as it appears in the page URL (i.e. the address bar at the top of the browser screen). So, the full address of ANEW is "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring"; you have to use, underscores and all. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:32, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * So I was right that it was me doing something stupid. Except... I fixed it as suggested and it still doesn't work. Anything obviously wrong with my common.js page now? --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:10, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * @Only: @Floquenbeam: Okay, second draft done. Should work for source, VE, and all permutations thereof. Still a bit ugly, but I think it's good now. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 18:50, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Huzzah! Works at ANEW, and works for both VE and normal editors on your sandbox ("view source" for normal editor, no tab at all for VE).  Thanks so much, WK. , since you were talking to him about this, do you want to make the suggestion? --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:04, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not 100% on the technical aspects of what's being suggested here, so I'd be more comfortable if you offered this to him. only (talk) 21:43, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * OK will do. And thanks again, WK. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:45, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for the accidental archiving
I clicked an "Archive" link forgetting that I had OneClickArchiver installed. I was trying to look up your archives to read a previous discussion. Please accept my humble apology. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 14:40, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Ha, no worries. Just out of curiosity, what previous discussion? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:25, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

If you've got a problem... if no-one else can help... then if you can find him, maybe you can hire... the Writ Keeper
Loved that show. So I have a problem, and as usual you're my first port of call for anything requiring a clever technical solution (but I can always bugger off to VPT if you're not up for it). Here's the problem: my watchlist is freaking huge; a great, bloated, 7,000+ list of pages most of which I have no particular need to watch any more. However, it's so huge that I can't actually remove stuff easily; any substantial changes take so long to be saved that the operation times out, so I have to trim it by removing a few lines at a time, saving, removing a few more lines and so on. It's tedious and rubbish. Now I know I should probably take better care of my watchlist, paring a little here, judiciously adding a page there, de-watching articles when I no longer want to improve them and carefully deleting IP talkpages (which account for about 20% of my total watched pages). I should also probably turn off the gadget that auto-watches any page I edit, but I actually find that quite useful. Instead, I'm going with plan B: ask Writ Keeper for a script. What I have in mind is something that can access my watchlist, identify any pages which haven't been edited in, say, three months, and delete them from the list. On the surface, that sounds like an easy thing, but I work with developers in my day job and let me tell you, what us mere mortals think is simple and what a PHP coder thinks is simple are two very different puppies. I imagine anything touching on watchlists is probably more complicated than I comprehend. So, that's my request; if you fancy a bit of code jiggery-pokery and haven't gotten fed up with my constant demands, I'd be super-happy if you wanted to take a crack at it. All the best, Yunshui 雲 水 09:51, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll take a look. Depending on the level of support from the API, this will either be very difficult or pretty easy. I'll let you know which is which. Hannibal (talk) 13:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Can't wait to see whet you come up with. Yunshui 雲 水 14:06, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This is going to sound like a snotty question/comment from someone who should keep their nose out of other people's business, but I promise it isn't intended to be. It's just I've kind of been dealing with my own watchlist recently, and originally thought I wanted something similar, but don't anymore. If a page hasn't been edited in 3 months, how does its presence on your watchlist affect you? I have probably hundreds of IP talk pages on my watchlist, but they hardly ever show up (and when they do, 80% of the time it means my previous schoolblock expired, they're getting warned for vandalism again, and it's time to block again). Similarly, inactive articles don't affect me at all unless they've recently been edited. I kind of assume many inactive pages aren't watched by many people, so when they do pop up, I'm more inclined to check the edit and see if it's vandalism. I only have 3000+ pages on my watchlist, so not quite at your level.  But after originally thinking that the problem was a large watchlist, I now think the real problem is active pages that I don't care about anymore, but that keep on popping up at the the top of the watchlist, pushing the stuff I do care about further down the page.  If you use popups to unwatch those pages when they do show up at the top, even a large watchlist is less annoying.  Are you just looking to get rid of the inactive pages so going thru the remainder manually to remove more is more manageable? Because I guess then that would make more sense.  And, have you tried copy/pasting the raw watchlist in a text editor or excel or something, deleting large swaths of IP talk pages or WP:space stuff or whatever pattern you want, and pasting it back into WP?  --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:10, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey Floq. Well, an awfully long time ago I recall seeing a discussion in which it was indicated that watchlists could start "topping out" after reaching a certain number of pages, so my concern was that I might be approaching that limit. However, when I went off to see if I could find the original place where that statement was made (so's I could come back here and go, "In your FACE, Floquenbeam, I need this!") I actually found that the implied upper limit, if it ever existed, is waaaaaaay more than what I've got. So - faulty memory on my part, perhaps.
 * The text editor thing I have tried, but its the size of the change that's the problem: even working with the raw watchlist it's all too easy to timeout the process with any big adjustment.
 * Upshot is: yeah, Floquenbeam's right, I probably don't need this as much as I thought I did. So... back to being a soldier of fortune for you, I guess, Writ? Yunshui 雲 水 14:20, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * awww, i just figured out how i'd do it. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:22, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, now I feel bad. Er... apology cake?



Yunshui 雲 水 has given you a WikiCake! WikiCakes promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cake, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of cakes by adding {{subst:GiveCake}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
 * Haha, it's no big deal, I like doing this. :) If anything, I'm more sad that I don't get to justify continuing to spend time on this; not at all that I've spent some time on it already. The design in my head was pretty inefficient and kinda ugly anyway. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:27, 13 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Maybe the system starts slowing down a lot between 3000 and 7000? While I had trouble editing the raw watchlist on Wikipedia, when I copied it to excel, cleared my watchlist completely, and pasted back a big chunk of it, it didn't time out on me during the pasting. Anyway, I didn't mean to take a paying job away from WK; sorry about that WK (Have some of Yunshui's cake on me). it's just, as an older white American male, I naturally assume everyone desperately needs to know what I think.  Floqsplaining. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:29, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah - had not thought of clearing the watchlist entirely before pasting back what I wanted (I'd just been overwriting the list). I might give that a go. Cheers for the suggestion! Yunshui 雲 水 14:32, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The "Are you absolutely sure you want to completely clear your watchlist, which you cannot decide to undo?" part was pretty scary; I think I chickened out and pasted it to my sock's watchlist first, just to be safe... --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:40, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
 * My watchlist is 13,941 pages (excluding talk). I'm doomed.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 21:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to Admin confidence survey
Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

commonHistory.js
Thanks for the User:Writ_Keeper/Scripts/commonHistory.js script; it is a real time saver. I just wanted to report a couple of issues I noticed: Let me know if you'd like more details on either issue. Thanks! -LiberatorG (talk) 18:52, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * For Wikidata changes the inline diff shows an unrelated diff from a different article
 * When used with the beta feature "New filters for edit review" (Special:Preferences), the Watchlist/Recent Changes end up in a narrow column that takes a lot of vertical space

So my last plea was a bit of a non-starter...
... but I like wasting your time, so here's a slightly different question for you to puzzle over... On my to do page, I use a modified version of the table at Template:Admin_dashboard. It's served me well, but I've recently decided to add a link for UTRS requests (to save having to transclude User:DeltaQuad/UTRS Appeals onto the to do page as well). However, getting a counter to work for that row is a bit beyond me; all the others use the PAGESINCAT expression, but obviously DQ's template isn't a category page. I wonder - do you know a way to create an expression that will count the number of rows in DQ's UTRS chart (ideally just the first table) and then display that value on my to do list? Bonus points if you manage to make it look stupidly obvious so that I appear incompetent and foolish into the bargain. Yunshui 雲 水 13:10, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmm, there's no easy way to do that, other than, which isn't exactly what you're looking for I think. I'm not sure what the criteria for that bot is, though; it seems like it's tagging some but not all open UTRS requests, so it's not an exact count. I could probably get a more accurate count of *both* tables with  and some fancy math, but I don't think I can get just a count of the first table that way. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:39, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't actually realise there was a Category:Requests for unblock on UTRS - so what you've done works perfectly. Plus, you did succeed in making me look like a numpty in the process (what sort of idiot wouldn't check to see if there was a category?), so you get the bonus points too! Yunshui 雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 13:58, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Haha, I don't know about that, I was pretty far down the parser-functions-and-Lua rabbit hole before I remembered that there was a UTRS template that a bot throws around and to check to see if it threw a category around too. :) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:04, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm still grateful, even if you've mitigated my buffoonery. On the subject of admin folly: your current userpage - you sure that's CC-BY-SA? Yunshui <sup style="font-size:90%">雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 15:17, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Uhhh... what userpage? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:18, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Your message
How is "wanna hear a joke" harrassment?? :-(
 * I suspect you don't actually need an explanation. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:07, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

RevDel
First, thank you for taking care of the page I CSDed. Second, I see that you are listed as an admin who is willing to perform revdels. Excuse me if this is the wrong way to go about it or if it doesn't fit the standards of revdel, but I believe the following edit summary should be looked at. Thank you https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2017%E2%80%9318_Premier_League&oldid=803174075  ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  14:24, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * No worries, asking an admin on their talk page is the preferred way of asking for a revdel, unless privacy concerns. That said, I don't think that edit summary particularly needs revdel, in my opinion; it doesn't seem to be aimed at anyone, and it's old enough to be old news anyway. Feel free to ask another admin for a second opinion, though; I'm probably relatively choosy about stuff like this. Either way, no problem at all to ask, and thanks! Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:31, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * No, you're probably right, it just caught my attention and remembered it when I saw your userpage. Cheers! ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  14:36, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

My talk page
Thanks for the response to that odd question, however I suspect that someone's laundry is speaking here. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:30, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, wouldn't be terribly surprised if it were a sock of someone. Don't really see the connection to that master yet, though, without other evidence...I'll probably let the CU request run its course unless we see more edits. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:35, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * And blocked as a sock of them. My hunch was indeed correct. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:40, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Yup, I saw. Works for me. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:42, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

ANI Experiences survey
Beginning on November 28, 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) will be conducting a survey to en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:


 * https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.


 * Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:12, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Precious four years!
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:16, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Script request
Hello, I understand that you are the reigning king of user scripts and I wondered if I could bug you for one? I'm looking for something that will remove an orphan template and leave an edit summary with one click (or a keyboard shortcut if that's easier, I'm not fussy). Something like, "No longer an orphan. To help, see WP:ORPHANAGE." I was looking at User:B/rescaledsidebar.js as something similar (single-click, removes a template and leaves an edit summary) but I don't know the first thing about js so I wouldn't know how to alter it to do what I want without breaking it. If you're busy, no problem - feel free to ignore this :) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 18:27, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * @Premeditated Chaos: Not at all, I'd be happy to help! What kind of clicky do you prefer? I see that the rescaled script thing creates a button in the sidebar; that's easy to do, but would something else be easier to use for you? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 18:37, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * @Premeditated Chaos: Okay, first draft is done! It's at User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deorphanizer.js. You can use it with the usual  into the .js page of your choice.
 * It's a little less tested than I'd prefer, but the Orphan template doesn't really work outside of userspace, so I can't do my usual testing in my sandbox. I did a couple test edits on an article in mainspace (1DayLater, to be specific), but I don't want to do too much of that for obvious reasons. So just keep an eye out for a bit. Good luck, hope this helps! :) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:54, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry for dropping off without replying, I got called away from the computer. I appreciate your speedy work on this! You're fantastic. Since you asked, is there any way to make it a top-bar button? Like up with "edit" "history" etc? If not, no worries. I'm going to go play with this right now :3 (PS, I have always enjoyed your username and sig) &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 20:57, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmmm...it's not showing up in my sidebar at all for some reason. I've tried purging the cache but no luck. It could be because I'm on a crap work computer, so I'll have to double check when I'm at home on an actual browser for humans. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 21:06, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * @Premeditated Chaos: Haha, no worries. Shouldn't be a problem to add it to the top, if you like; I'll look into that. In the meantime, is there a particular page that it's not showing up for? I tried importing your common.js, and it seems to be working. (I actually made it so that it only shows up for orphaned articles, btw; the link won't be there if it's not an orphan.) and thanks, Slick Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 22:01, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Should be at the top now, amongst the tabs. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 22:04, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I've tried it on several different pages (and have purged cache and even re-started my browser) but it still doesn't show up. I'll see if it runs at home on Chrome and will let you know? &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 23:04, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It works! It's perfect! Thank you!!! :D:D:D &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 00:11, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Haha, no problem, I'm glad you like it! Yeah, it might not work on some versions of IE (especially older ones), but it should work on most other browsers. Let me know if you have any other problems with it, or any more script requests! I love writing scripts for people. :) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 00:36, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * @Premeditated Chaos: just FYI, I think I've fixed the cross-browser compatibility problem; hopefully it should work in IE now. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 17:50, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

User:PBadali
Given this, perhaps PBdali's TPA should be revoked? Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:27, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Pay$tation Portable
Huh? How is something created in 2007 recently created? -- Tavix ( talk ) 02:03, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that was my bad. It was recently nominated, but I didn't realize how old the redirect itself was. It was just some cleanup from pagemove vandalism, so I didn't look closely at the timestamps. G3 or G6 might've been better, but eh. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 03:55, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Inspect diff gadget only producing plaintext
It appears as of today, this very useful gadget is missing it's CSS and is only rendering the diff in plaintext. If you could look into that, I would appreciate it.— CYBERPOWER  ( Chat ) 23:40, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Seeing same, thanks! -- Green  C  00:09, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I saw that earlier, but wrote it off as a one-time error in loading something. Lemme take a look. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 02:46, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, should be fixed now. Guess they changed  to , or something. Cheers y'all! Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 03:34, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks! -- Green  C  23:56, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot. It works perfectly again. :-)— CYBERPOWER  ( Message ) 04:18, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Mass rollback
Hi Writ Keeper. Is there a way to make mass rollback a bit smarter so that it can do rollbacks of talk page posts subsequently signed by Sinebot? --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 04:11, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * That's gonna be pretty difficult, actually. Right now, mass rollback just uses the actual rollback feature (as in the right) on all the pages where it's able to be used. Accounting for Sinebot means having to check every page for Sinebot's edits, and then manually mimicking the rollback by finding the next good edit, since we wouldn't be able to use actual rollback. That's a big change in the scope of the script. I'll look at it, but I can't promise it'll make sense to actually implement. (Really, what we should ask for is for Mediawiki itself to allow the option to "ignore" edits from particular accounts for the purposes of rollback, so that we could still use vanilla rollback on Sinebot-signed edits. I doubt the devs would want to do that, though.) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:29, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Tweaked/fixed mickipedia script
Hope you don't mind, but I made a slight tweak to the excellent User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/mickopedia.js. It seems |they changed their url. ~ Amory ( u  •  t  •  c ) 17:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
ok

Johngpants (talk) 16:40, 14 February 2018 (UTC) <br style="clear: both;"/>

A couple of script bugs
Big fan of your work, so I wanted to (selfishly) offer a few potential bugfixes. I should preface this by saying I have a stupid amount of user scripts loaded, and use the modern skin, but have tested and confirmed these with a clean install of vector.


 * userHistory doesn't work; the console spits out an error with "hookevent."
 * commonHistory is just lovely, but on the watchlist, the diffs with  (pages with one diff) have the inline diff button adjacent to the page title with no spaces.  No issue on history or contribs pages, or on the watchlist with pages with multiple changes.
 * watchlistDiffs doesn't seem to work. Here's the output from Firefox' console:

Selfishly, I'll add that while I adore the inline diffs, the "inspect diff" style is a little weighty for me. Any chance of incorporating  like contribs/generalHistory? Moreover, when using, the button text is hardcoded, erasing the other options. ~ Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 18:18, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Bleh, I'm not gonna lie: I haven't been maintaining the diff viewer scripts other than commonHistory for some time (since there's no real need to use all the other ones if one just installs commonHistory). I guess I can go back and fix 'em up; I'm not surprised at all that they don't work. For the issue with commonHistory.js, what output would you think is better? The way it is now is intentional, but I admit it's pretty clunky--the interface for the contrib grouping is pretty weird. I'm open to suggestions: do you just think it needs a space between the button and the page title, or something more drastic? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:27, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Well don't go fixin' it up on my account — I only discovered it was busted when seeing if the same spacing issue was there on the watchlist. AFAIK, contribs and general work just fine.  Regarding commonHistory.js, yeah, I think a space between the final bracket and the page name is all it needs.  The grouped diffs are perfect, there's a space before the page size difference. ~  Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 19:36, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * How's that? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:21, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Perfect! ~ Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 20:32, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Cool! I've fixed watchlistDiffs, as well (mostly just a copypaste of commonHistory, so it should have all of the bells and whistles that has). As for userHistory....I have to admit. I have no memory of this place. I don't even know what the script is supposed to be doing? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:34, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * As a great anonymous user once said, I feel immense shame, horror and bewilderment when I look at my old code. Did I really write this rubbish? Thanks for taking a look so quickly, the watchlist fix is a great relief! ~  Amory <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 22:08, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Thank you
Apparently there is a user left that won't tolerate me being called an ass, a jerk, an idiot and silly. I don't want to waste your time by asking you to react, I've read that this would be disruptive editing. But I notice that I'm now fair game, and that's why I'll probably in fact leave entirely. But not without thanking someone who withstood the peer pressure. Keep it up, this is the best within you! --Mathmensch (talk) 08:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Looks a problem with deletion finder
When I tried deletion finder on article Shawn O%27Hagan it doesn't show any log because of ' in the name of article. &#8208;&#8208;1997kB (talk) 16:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the bug report! Should be fixed now. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 17:25, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

Gianluca filipetti
I dunno that this isn't too borderline to take to UAA, but given that the username is a reference to Trailer Park Boys and a sex act, combined with an attack page, I'd say you could probably make a case for a NOTHERE block if you're feeling frisky. G M G <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  19:24, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Meh. I've only seen the first season or two of Trailer Park Boys (years ago), so I didn't pick up the reference. Juvenile, to be sure, but personally I wouldn't dignify it with either--now that the attack page is deleted, let it lie unless they come back, and if they do, simply block. Just my two lazy cents, though, and you're probably right in general--you're more than welcome to ask UAA or another admin about their friskiness levels. I guess I'm just not really feeling it today. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:34, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Eh. Me neither.  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk  19:41, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Undeletion request for John (actor) page
Dear Writ Keeper,

I noted that you deleted John (actor) page which I modified and added more reference hoping it will stay. It will be great of you if you could please check the flaws on the page I created. The original page was protected from creation so I moved to page after editing the draft John (actor). Please check the article and if possible please reinstate. Thanks a lot Godisthebestone (talk) 09:54, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, Godisthebestone. I appreciate your work on the article, but I'm sorry: I won't restore that page. I see your additions to it, but they didn't satisfy the concerns stated in the original deletion discussion. As such, the original deletion still stands, and so I'm standing by my G4 deletion.
 * This isn't to say that there can never be an article on John Kaippallil, just that the text of this article as it stood is a bad basis for an article, since it wasn't rooted in demonstrating their notability, and there are other issues, too. The article you were editing originated as a straight copy-paste of what was deleted in that discussion--in fact, its first revision still included the tag that nominated it for deletion--and in addition to replicating the problems noted in the deletion discussion, that technically makes it a copyright violation, since it was unattributed. It would be much better to start a draft article from scratch, though the concerns from the deletion discussion would still have to be addressed in that draft.
 * Also, please don't change the name of the page you're trying to create to circumvent creation protection. That's against the rules; this kind of situation is exactly what creation protection is intended to prevent. Instead, once you have a draft that you think is good enough, put a request in at WP:RFPP to get the correct title opened up. That's how things like this should go.
 * I'm sorry to dismiss your work like this; like I said earlier, the effort is still appreciated. But this article has been problematically recreated too many times--which is why it was creation-protected in the first place--and has too many outstanding issues for me to recreate it, even in draft form. If you disagree with my assessment, please feel free to ask for a second opinion at WP:REFUND. Thanks, and happy editing, Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:34, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Your reopening of the discussion
No don't worry, I'm not going to ask you to revert, your comments are correct, I boldly closed the discussion, so yes, I was aware it could be opened, however when Allan Scott Jackson re-opened it, he didn't really gave no valid reason to re-open the discussion, I've  pretty much said that on his page and I explained why I closed it to begin with. NO, I won't revert you, but, in short, my close was based on the fact that the issue with Jytog and Sandy Georiga was based on their disagreement with Doc James's videos. He voluntarily removed the videos, so, the issue's closed. Any further discussion is pointless and serves no other point other than to beat a dead horse. <span style="background:black;padding:1px;color:gold;text-shadow:white 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em; font-family:Papyrus, Georgia, Arial"> К  Ф Ƽ Ħ  14:49, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I respect that. Reverting you like that was probably a bit snippy on my part; sorry about that. I'm having an off morning, I think. I shoulda left well enough alone; while I still don't really think your reclose was an optimal thing, it wasn't all that bad either--I don't think you're wrong when you say that nothing good is gonna come out of that discussion staying open. :P Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:55, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Carthaginian
Thanks, I agree with the restoration of the redirect – no, A7 may not apply here but I wasn't sure what this came under, really... it seemed like WP:NOTDICTIONARY to me. I notified the article author, who is a long-standing editor of repute on Wikipedia – I'll see if he comes back to me about my actions. Richard3120 (talk) 17:13, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure, no worries; I don't think you were far off-base at all. Not that my opinion is worth all that much, but I'd be happy to join in any conversation about this; I think the number of links to Carthaginian that specifically refer to Carthage makes a pretty strong case for keeping the redirect, but I'm always happy to be convinced otherwise. :) Cheers! Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 17:17, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * So, HMS Rifleman (1809) captured a 2000-year old ship in the Caribbean? Interesting. How about we undo the redirect and make the page a disambig page? Acad Ronin (talk) 18:49, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * No, but neither did a Colombian privateer named Hannibal cross the Alps, and neither did Colombian privateers make trading settlements in the prehistoric Iberian peninsula, nor did Plutarch neglect the absence of Colombian privateers in the calculation of Cato the Elder's age, etc. etc. I'm pretty sure that, even in the 1800s, the word still generally meant a person from ancient Carthage, and that it was (mis?)appropriated by the press to refer to people from Cartagena. A dab page might work, but I just don't know that there's enough material to make an article out of the privateer sense of the word, and without an article for its own, I don't think a dab page is indicated. I feel like overall, the reader will be better served by a redirect, since one has to assume the vast majority of people looking up the word "Carthaginian" will be looking for Ancient Carthage, and not a term used by the British press to refer to Colombian privateers. Perhaps a hatnote at the top of Ancient Carthage, of the form ""Carthaginian" redirects here. For the term as used to describe privateers from Cartagena, Colombia, see insurgent privateer"? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:08, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Understood, but I did a little googling. It turns out that WP has an article Carthaginian (ship). The Louisiana Historical Quarterly (1923), p. 128, has an article that points out that "...'Carthaginian flag' were used indiscriminately by many North American seamen and applied by them to all vessels and all national colors of all revolted Spanish colonies. Louisianan privateersmen from the Cartagenan cruisers of Barataria helped General Andrew Jackson repulse the British attack in the Battle of New Orleans." President James Madison's papers mention "A number of Privateers first sailing under the french, afterwards under the Carthaginian flag have for four years past brought their prizes to the Bay of Barataria in this State". Net-net, the current redirect does not help anyone seeing a 19th century reference to "Carthaginian" and trying to figure out what it means.Acad Ronin (talk) 19:16, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure, okay, I see that. I think that a hatnote would help that person with the 19th century reference, but with another article named Carthaginian to put in it, I can get behind a dab page. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:23, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, I converted it to a dab page, with Ancient Carthage as the primary topic. Let me know what you think. Thanks! Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 19:31, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I really like that. It's elegant. Many thanks. Acad Ronin (talk) 19:36, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Mass rollback
Hi! I use your mass rollback script, or at least, I think I do – I get a "Smart rollback" link hovering above the search box. Assuming I've got the right script, there seems to have been a fairly recent change: the custom edit summary appears no longer to work. This could of course be just user error, but I've noticed it twice in the last few days. My recent rollback of edits by 95.237.26.20, e.g. to Accademia di Belle Arti di Napoli, should have had the custom summary "sockpuppetry", but does not. Can you shed any light? Many thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:03, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, "smart rollback" link above the search box? That doesn't sound like my script, actually; my script should be the "rollback all" link that appears in the "More" dropdown next to the search bar (at least in Vector, which is what I'm guessing you use). Screenshot attached, for illustration; is this what you're using? For reference, my script does still seem to do the custom edit summaries; here's an example. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:54, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Smart rollback is m:User:Hoo man/Scripts/Smart rollback. has your script installed in User:Justlettersandnumbers/common.js and smart rollback in m:User:Justlettersandnumbers/global.js. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 15:54, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, the global script thing. That's why I couldn't find a reference to it in JLaN's .js pages on en. Makes sense. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:55, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Right, that's that explained. Thanks so much to both, apologies for getting it wrong (yet again ...). Now I'm going to remove Hoo man's version. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:00, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

i am. furhan.
Hi,

Can you ban me from wikipedia?- I am. furhan. (talk) 20:48, 12 April 2018 (UTC)i am. furhan.
 * Hey, sorry, but I don't mess with self-requested blocks. One or another of these people might be able to help you with blocking your account, if that's what you want. Do you mind if I ask why? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:52, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Oh because i dont use it anymore and i dont feel like having it. I am. furhan. (talk) 14:00, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay. Well, if you want to be blocked, one of the admins in the category linked above might be able to help you with that. There shouldn't be any harm in just leaving your account around, though. There's no way to delete accounts or detach their contributions (for attribution/copyright reasons), but you can detach your email address from your account by going to Special:ChangeEmail and leaving the new email address field blank, which should stop you from getting any Wikipedia-related emails. You can also set your password to something random if you want to keep yourself from logging back into it. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, though; good luck with the future! Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:09, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

... Do you have the power to ban other people? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avengers Infinity War (talk • contribs) 20:09, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

User:SKETCH PORTRAIT ARTIST DELHI
Hi there. I just blocked this account and thought I'd let you know. De728631 (talk) 15:30, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I probably shoulda just blocked immediately, but I think I got distracted by something. Definitely the right result though. Cheers! Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:48, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

JJakeN Scientology Article
Hello,

I recently published an article entitled "Abusive and Controversial Practices in Scientology", and according to another Wikipedia contributor, it was deleted according to CSD A10, for being to similar to Scientology controversies. However, as I mentioned on Breaking Sticks' Talk Page, where I was alerted to this, I felt that the content included in my article was sufficiently different from the content included in the Scientology Controversies page that is warranted the creation of a new page. The content in the Scientology Controversies page primarily focuses on monetary exploitation, while the content in my article focused on physical and mental exploitation and mistreatment of members of the Scientology community. After reviewing my article, and the Scientology Controversies page, I still feel that my content is sufficiently different that is warrants the creation of a new page. If you feel that I need to include additional information to make it sufficiently different, or if you feel that I need to reorganize my article, please let me know. I am new to the Wikipedia editing community, so I am still unsure of what is required to ensure that an article makes it through moderation. Any help that you can provide me with is appreciated. Thank you. JJakeN (talk) 16:40, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey, JJakeN. First of all, it's probably important to note that Scientology is a touchy subject on Wikipedia, as you may have read about in the relevant section of the page I linked you to. Thus, trying to add content like this to the Scientology pages might not be the best place to start on Wikipedia. With that said, I disagree with you that the content you want to add needs its own article; whether it should even be added to the controversies section is questionable. First of all, it was pretty weakly sourced; a few of the sections had no sources at all, or sources that didn't support what it claimed. Second of all, it's pretty clearly written from an anti-Scientology POV; it's not surprising for content surrounding controversies to seem critical of the controversies' subject, no matter what that subject is, but I'm not sure the article is giving a fair shake. You place a lot of article real estate on single anecdotes and then place vague, unsupported references to "other former members" to confirm. The article still reads as what's referred to in Wikipedia-speak as a POV fork, content split out from its appropriate parent article into its own article to give it undue emphasis and to cut away surrounding context. That's not how it should go; it should be added to the controversies article first (probably after a paring-down). The controversies article certainly doesn't just cover monetary exploitation, with its discussion of Fair Game and the like; content like this would be clearly within its scope and should thus be added to the existing article instead of being created in a new article (though to be fair the controversies article is already very long).
 * That's what I think, but you're certainly allowed to continue to disagree. If you do, the next step is to post at the deletion review board, to get an outside opinion. That's the place to go to contest deletions. I make mistakes like anyone, so it's certainly not impossible that the deletion will get overturned there. Thanks for checking with me first though; it was definitely reasonable to ask, and feel free to ask me anything else you like. Sorry for the rough introduction to Wikipedia; like I said, this is a tough subject to start with. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 17:34, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Default block script
Not sure why, but the default block script you wrote for me in January has stopped working? --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 16:44, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I'll take a look. I think people keep putzing around with that interface. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 16:59, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * @NeilN: Yep, probably something to do with the calendar widget they added to it. Should be good now; let me know if you have any more problems with it. god forbid they actually keep anything consistent... Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 21:11, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Works again. Thanks! --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 18:06, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

SPI script
Hey Writ Keeper, you created the script that tells us at SPI the creation date of an account and, in some instances, the last date edited. As far as I'm concerned, it's the best thing since sliced bread. Now that I've buttered you up a bit (pun intended), can you create a script that does the same thing but for a sock category? At the moment, it's very tedious to find non-stale accounts in a large sock category. Sometimes I just don't bother. A script telling me who's stale and who isn't would be terrific. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:07, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Haha, sure! That should not be a problem. Just for "Category:Sockpuppets of " pages? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 02:16, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks, unless there's something else you can think of... --Bbb23 (talk) 02:31, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * @Bbb23: Okay, done, it's at User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/sockStaleness.js. Should work on any "Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of..." or "Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of..." Install in the usual way; it should respect the same  customization as the cuStaleness script. Feel free to let anyone else know who might find it useful, and as always, let me know with problems or feedback. Thanks! Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:58, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm lame when it comes to scripts ("Install in the usual way"). I assume I install it at User:Bbb23/vector.js but how?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:03, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * @Bbb23: You can just put  at the bottom of that vector.js page on a new line. :) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:54, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I may have no idea what I'm doing, but I can follow simple instructions.:-) It appears to work just like the other, although sometimes when I click on the red message to process the next group, it doesn't seem to react as crisply, and I have to reload or do something to get it to work, which, as long as I'm here, brings up a few questions about this and the other script: (1) On non-stale accounts, sometimes it tells you the last edit and sometimes it doesn't; the last edit feature is an excellent one because it often helps me prioritize the order in which I do things at SPI, meaning accounts that are more recently disruptive take a higher priority. (2) I know the script catches deleted edits but it doesn't appear to catch filter trips; could it? (3) Is there any way of increasing the number of accounts it processes? On long archives it can be very tedious to have to keep going through clicks from the beginning just to find out if the accounts at the end are stale. (4) If #3 isn't feasible, is there a way to resolve staleness in reverse order at an archive? Sorry to pepper you with questions but I've been saving them up in my head. --Bbb23 (talk) 16:54, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Haha, no worries! I'm already ahead of you for 3 and 4: there is a way to increase the number of accounts it processes. Just put  (or however many you want) on a new line above the sockStaleness.js (and the cuStaleness.js, it'll work on that too) in your vector.js page. The performance does seem to suffer; I have to do a little more processing per thing. I don't think edit filter trips can be caught, but I'll look into it when I have a bit more time; ditto 1. I hope you find it useful! Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 22:35, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * To paraphrase the elves in Tolkien's trilogy, "now here is a jewel among admins".--Bbb23 (talk) 22:46, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't know about that, I just like fiddling with scripts and helping people. The reason it doesn't always show the date of last edit is performance optimization; it checks the account creation date and, if that date alone makes the account non-stale, then it doesn't bother to ask for the date of the most recent edit, saving time and network traffic. I don't mind giving you the option of changing that, just keep in mind there will be a performance cost. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Okay, the switch is ready. To make the script always check for and display contrib dates (that is to say, to disable lazy mode), put  on a new line above your sockStaleness.js script, just like the maxUsersCUStaleness. I haven't changed cuStaleness to also respect that switch, but I can if you think it'd be useful. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:30, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, the switch would be much more useful for CUStaleness and of marginal use for sockStaleness. Mostly all I want to know for previously blocked socks is if they are stale or not. It's at SPI that the switch would help.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:36, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure, that makes sense. I've changed the above switch to work for the SPI version of the script, so if you have  set to false, you should be good for SPIs. There's now a different switch for the category version; that one is  . You'd set that one in the same way as the CU version. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 14:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I've added the switch for the SPI accounts, and it works fine. I'm not sure when or even if I'll notice a performance issue, but for the moment I'm happy. Thanks again.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

User:PBadali posting anonymously
Just so you know, I believe User:PBadali, whom you blocked in January, is responsible for this edit at the Math Reference Desk. I haven't done an IP search or anything; I'm just going by the style (e.g. 'Thanks in advance'), similarity in content with other posts at the Ref. Desk, and the fact that it links to an external page signed the same way. In any case, the post is promoting an OR solution to a well-known unsolved problem (the Collatz conjecture) and generally I don't think the Ref. Desk should be used to referee original research. I'm not sure what the policy is on blocked users posting anonymously or creating new accounts, but it seems like some sort of official warning is in order at least. --RDBury (talk) 11:03, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think you're right, and they're not allowed, it's block evasion, but I'm just not up to it today. Having a bad couple of days. Sorry. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:29, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem. I'd revert the post myself but it looks like no one's going to bother answering and it will be automatically deleted in a few days anyway. Meanwhile I'll check on recent edits at the Collatz page for anything dubious. --RDBury (talk) 06:11, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Update: PBadali posted on the math reference desk again. This time I deleted it right away, which, of course, generated some pushback on my talk page. I suggested taking the matter up with an admin or third party so as not to get into a discussion about the merits of the post. The user did post something on the Collatz talk page but it was already deleted for being inappropriate. --RDBury (talk) 13:30, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Rupert Lee Browne
Hello Writ_Keeper I was wondering why you deleted my contribution on Rupert Lee Browne. Firstly I filled the tried and tested the!plate that has previously been approved. I wrote this as I saw him speak at a fintech conf last year and then met him and was very impressed with his story. Can you also resend me the deleted copy so I can amend it are try and repost. As I also don't have a record of all the citations and references and really want to post this. Any suggestions to not have it deleted are very welcome j Jamesmaharrison (talk) 16:51, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hey, James. First, let me apologize for not explaining a little more about the deletion before now; I should have done that. One of the bigger reasons I deleted your page is simply that it was in the wrong place; when you moved the article out of Draft:, you moved it into Wikipedia: space, which is actually not where articles go. The Wikipedia: space is where policy pages and the like go; real articles go into the article space, which doesn't have a prefix. Just for future reference, when you go to move a page to make it a full article, you need to select (Article) from the dropdown menu (it should be the first option), not Wikipedia. It's an easy mistake to make.
 * The fact that it was in the wrong place influenced my decision to delete it, honestly. The article read a bit promotional in tone to me: phrases like After a successful two years, and he has now grown the business to a turnover of more than £1bn, while not blatantly spammy, are the kind of vague, nonspecific positive comments that we get a lot. It wasn't all that bad by itself, but combined with it being in the wrong place, it didn't look very good. (As an aside, this wasn't a unilateral decision by me; another user felt it was promotional and nominated it for deletion, and I concurred and carried out the actual deletion.)
 * The article needs some work in that area, as well as some proofreading and copyediting; there are some typos and ungrammatical sentences in it. It probably could use some help with notability, too, which is the criteria we use to determine whether there should be an article about a subject or not. I'm happy to restore it to its draft location (Draft:Rupert Lee-Browne) to allow you to work on it, though. Thanks, and happy editing. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 18:02, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi and thanks so much for the feedback - really useful and helpful - I have now edited the page and hopefully posted it in the right place! Thanks again Jamesmaharrison (talk) 09:37, 31 May 2018 (UTC)