Jump to content

User talk:HouseBlaster: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 429: Line 429:
:Apparently it is a community sanction, rather than a purely admin-imposed sanction thus it can be placed only at [[WP:EDRC]] which was already done by HouseBlaster. [[User:Dympies|Dympies]] ([[User talk:Dympies|talk]]) 16:24, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
:Apparently it is a community sanction, rather than a purely admin-imposed sanction thus it can be placed only at [[WP:EDRC]] which was already done by HouseBlaster. [[User:Dympies|Dympies]] ([[User talk:Dympies|talk]]) 16:24, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
:I will correct the record regarding appeal time – thank you! I do not think this is a [[WP:CASTE]] sanction (even though it covers the same thing). Best, <b>[[User:HouseBlaster|House]][[Special:Contributions/HouseBlaster|<span style="color:#7D066B;">Blaster</span>]]</b>&nbsp;(he/they) 16:28, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
:I will correct the record regarding appeal time – thank you! I do not think this is a [[WP:CASTE]] sanction (even though it covers the same thing). Best, <b>[[User:HouseBlaster|House]][[Special:Contributions/HouseBlaster|<span style="color:#7D066B;">Blaster</span>]]</b>&nbsp;(he/they) 16:28, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

== Category for Discussion :American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent ==

Hi there,

I saw the discussion at Categories for Discussion regarding "American People Who Self-identify as being of Native American Descent" was just closed.

It looks like people were still voting at the time the discussion was closed as no consensus. I think relisting it again would likely create clearer consensus. Would you consider reopening the discussion? [[User:Whitewolfdog1|Whitewolfdog1]] ([[User talk:Whitewolfdog1|talk]]) 17:11, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:11, 25 October 2024

Welcome to my talk page!
Note: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave me a message here, I will respond to it here as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. Unless you request otherwise, I will ping you so that you know I have responded. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there.

Thank you!

No action on CfD closures

You seem to have a backlog of CfD closures you haven't handled through WP:CFDW or its talk page, such as Category:Cenozoic horses. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 02:19, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LaundryPizza03: Thank you for the note; I'll see what I can do :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 02:21, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I came across Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_October_9#Category:Constituencies_of_the_National_Assembly_of_Botswana_(historic) and implemented it myself, as it was fiddly. – Fayenatic London 10:16, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Fayenatic london! HouseBlaster (he/they) 00:58, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

License change request

Hi, I got an email from you about changing the license on this image ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Msu-Languagebuilding-seabhcan.JPG) - Happy to change it, but I can't remember how to do that... ... Seabhcan 09:54, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Seabhcan! Thank you so so much for your quick response! The easiest way to do this is to simply reply here and say "I intended to release the image under the GFDL". I can take care of the wiki-code bits. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 16:20, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin October Issue 1


MediaWiki message delivery 23:30, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Messed up CFDW formatting

I wanted to tell you that the syntax you added to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Working concerning the Indian Jain poets categories appears malformed. Compassionate727 (T·C) 18:56, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you; I will investigate. HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:07, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2024-42

MediaWiki message delivery 21:17, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi. I was about to suggest here for "Transgender identity in", based on Catégorie:Transidentité par pays [fr] and Categoría:Identidades trans por país [es]. Is it possible to reopen/relist as it was recently closened and not moved yet? --MikutoH talk! 00:54, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MikutoH: Ack. The bot is moving them as I type this (and had already moved some when I started to write this message) The bot has moved the categories, and there is no way to stop the bot while it is currently processing things (besides blocking it, which is a very extreme measure). Reversing and reopening the move would be more work than simply renominating it (User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/massXFD will help with a batch nomination). Therefore, I would recommend opening a fresh move request, making it clear why this is taking place immediately after the last one and potentially pinging the participants in the previous discussion. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 01:05, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: GA backlog drive

Hello! Just a reminder that, if you have time, you are welcome to join the GA backlog drive; it runs until the end of October. You are receiving this message because you signed up on the drive page but have not yet listed any reviews. We hope to see you there! Either way, happy editing! —Ganesha811 (talk) 05:49, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:JessZoiti/sandbox

Hello, HouseBlaster. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "sandbox".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 02:42, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy vanishing

In case you should encounter a similar situation again, please note that courtesy vanishing is a courtesy, not a right. Blocked users are not eligible. "A courtesy vanishing may be implemented when a user in good standing decides not to return" (my emphasis). Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 16:23, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Cabayi for the correction. Apologies for my confusion :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 19:15, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aspersions

I appreciate your thoroughness against aspersions [7], even when they consist of an unchallenged claim about the difficulty of finding more diffs that exhibit the same pattern of behaviour which I have supported with evidence. I was able to find another one, though [8], but I will look no further because it is time-consuming and also unnerving. However, I would be grateful if you could also remove Elinruby's aspersions against me. That would be fair and due. You will find an (incomplete) list in this edit [9]. Note that in the fourth one in the list (off-Wiki campaign) Elinruby mentions evidence privately submitted to the ArbCom; however, given the private nature of the evidence and the public nature of the accusation, it is aspersions and should be removed, please. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 05:57, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gitz. Requests like this should be made to the clerk team as a whole, not just an individual. I am going to ask you to move this to either the workshop talk (or, if you wish to be discrete about it, which I would completely understand, by email to clerks-l@lists.wikimedia.org). Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 22:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thank you for the suggestion. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 23:11, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

Group eponymous template categorization

Have we a quick way to remove these from their eponymous categories? Pretty much every single one of them is a member of their group's eponymous category and apparently shouldn't be. RachelTensions (talk) 01:59, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi RachelTensions! Unfortunately, I am unaware of a tool that would do something like that. Someone at WP:AWBREQ might have a better idea, but this seems difficult (mostly because you are not looking for the same character sequence in each template, if that makes sense). Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 02:25, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes one of our AWB friends might be able to figure it out, thank you!
RachelTensions (talk) 02:26, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2024-43

MediaWiki message delivery 20:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

The Admin Elections barnstar
Thanks for removing the {{Notice}}s on the candidate pages for the discussion period. I was wondering why my regex in AWB wasn't picking anything up ;-) –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are definitely getting this barnstar back at you after this thing is done, Novem Linguae. Thank you for everything you have done to get WP:EFA (which is the superior shortcut) off the ground :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 00:18, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, want a bonus quest? I think we should go through every candidate page and delete =====General comments=====. It's redundant and is making the table of contents at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Discussion phase look meh. Thoughts? :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:36, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely agree.  Doing... HouseBlaster (he/they) 00:39, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done, and thank you for the suggestion, Novem Linguae :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 00:42, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amazing work. I'm doubling your salary! :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:43, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whoot! These checks are getting so big ;) HouseBlaster (he/they) 01:10, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections: Discussion phase

Administrator Elections | Discussion phase

The discussion phase of the October 2024 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

  • October 22–24 - Discussion phase
  • October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
  • November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

During October 22–24, we will be in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages will open to questions and comments from everyone, in the same style as a request for adminship. You may discuss the candidates at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Discussion phase.

On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Growth News, October 2024

Trizek_(WMF), 15:43, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:23, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Question from Dman1423 (23:13, 24 October 2024)

i hate isochrone --Dman1423 (talk) 23:13, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dman1423. Please only use the "ask a question" feature to ask questions. Thanks, HouseBlaster (he/they) 23:55, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation Bulletin October Issue 2


MediaWiki message delivery 23:52, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections: Voting phase

Administrator Elections | Voting phase

The voting phase of the October 2024 administrator elections has started and continues until 23:59 31st October 2024 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

  • October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
  • November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies for a vote will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quick favor to ask

Hello, I saw you on the list of recently active admins. Would you mind handling an edit request? I'd like to get this process started before the demands of life steal me away from wikipedia. GrayStorm(Complaints Dept.|My Contribs.) 04:00, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@GrayStorm: I have tagged the page. Please create the MFD page shortly :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 04:01, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Ironically, I had to step away from my computer for a few minutes after that. Funny how life is sometimes :) GrayStorm(Complaints Dept.|My Contribs.) 04:15, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adamantine topic ban

Hi HouseBlaster. Just a heads up that sanctions can be appealed anytime at AN (not just after six months). Assuming that this was a sanction under WP:CASTE, you should probably also log it there. RegentsPark (comment) 16:12, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently it is a community sanction, rather than a purely admin-imposed sanction thus it can be placed only at WP:EDRC which was already done by HouseBlaster. Dympies (talk) 16:24, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will correct the record regarding appeal time – thank you! I do not think this is a WP:CASTE sanction (even though it covers the same thing). Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 16:28, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category for Discussion :American people who self-identify as being of Native American descent

Hi there,

I saw the discussion at Categories for Discussion regarding "American People Who Self-identify as being of Native American Descent" was just closed.

It looks like people were still voting at the time the discussion was closed as no consensus. I think relisting it again would likely create clearer consensus. Would you consider reopening the discussion? Whitewolfdog1 (talk) 17:11, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]