Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:ANI)
Jump to: navigation, search


This is a message board for talking about tasks on Wikipedia that only administrators can do. Please put new messages at the bottom of the talk page or click here to start a new discussion.

Please note that the messages on this page are archived periodically. A message may therefore have been archived. Note however, that the archives must not be modified, so if something needs discussing, please start a new discussion on this page.

Are you in the right place?

  • See WP:CHU to change your user name or take another user name.
  • See WP:RFCU for CheckUser requests.
  • See WP:OS for oversight.

Update messages[change source]

I am not sure if this was brought up before, but I do hope that an administrator can update the following messages so that it is more consistent and/or simpler.

Thanks! --Hydriz (talk) 04:34, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Ping. Is help required on updating these messages? --Hydriz (talk) 12:11, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Or people don't agree. Personally I don't see the point. The first one already says that. The second two basically already say that as well. The last two use the word My because it makes it simplier, in that the context is given and doesn't need to be assumed. -DJSasso (talk) 16:38, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Having some response is always better than complete silence on a high traffic page. Please see the discussion about this message on why the "My" should be dropped. From a user experience perspective, it is not ideal. Having just "Settings" or "Changes" is even simpler than having the "My" in it, which just seeks to confuse the user more. --Hydriz (talk) 10:26, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
I see no reason to set it to the (new) MediaWiki default (without the "my"). I believe we just need to delete the MediaWiki page for it to revert to the default. This will ensure consistency across the other Wikimedia wikis, as well as with the other links on the personal tools (beta, watchlist, talk). Chenzw  Talk  12:08, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
No, having no "my" makes it more complex to non-English speakers as it makes it harder to understand what is meant. Using the word My gives it context to the user. Remember shorter does not always mean simpler. -DJSasso (talk) 13:32, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
I agree with DJSasso on this one. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:55, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
I am not exactly sure what kind of context you are referring to, but basing on your opinion, we should change the rest to become "My <something>". The inconsistency isn't professional. --Hydriz (talk) 14:57, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
What settings? Page settings? Wiki settings? User settings? What changes? Recent changes? Page changes? User changes? The only two that require the context are those two so it isn't inconsistent. We are different than other wiki's. What might be perfectly fine for them does not work here. Remember we have to be simple in everything we do on this wiki, not just the language we use. -DJSasso (talk) 15:09, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Again, I would like to bring in the problem of it being confusing to the user. Have a look at some best practices regarding these. If you are referring to those kind of contexts, then having "Settings" or "Changes" alone is sufficient. Why? This is because from the user's perspective, they can see that it is on the same row as the user's name and they know the context is about the user himself. Also, by inconsistent, I mean that some links have "My", some don't, and that is not a recommended practice, regardless of whether this is simple English or not. --Hydriz (talk) 15:22, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
For people who don't know the language well having them alone is not sufficient. Experienced users might be able to deduce that, but not all users. And since we always opt for the simplest common denominator we must work for those who are not experienced. And yes, I was aware that is what you meant by inconsistent. My answer still holds, only two of them require the My. But I would be perfectly find adding My to all the others. I would not however, be fine removing them. -DJSasso (talk) 15:29, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
I believe that is an assumption about the differences between the experienced and inexperienced user. I proposed this change precisely because it is to simplify it for inexperienced users. Our users aren't people who are new to the Internet and Wikipedia is certainly not the first website that they have seen. Other websites that they are more likely to go to have dropped the "My" or "Your" in all user-related links, and for us to leave them there, it probably have harmed than helped. --Hydriz (talk) 15:37, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Except that there is a good chance they are. Don't forget our audience is partly children who haven't necessarily been exposed to the internet much. -DJSasso (talk) 16:20, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
If they haven't been exposed to the Internet much, what is the likelihood that they will create an account, even more specifically try to change their account preferences or looks for their own changes? Even if they are, again my point is that it will only seek to confuse the user. Also, please have a look at this wiki's own mobile site, it just says "Settings" when you click the hamburger, and it is very clear to the user what it is referring to. Children are more likely to be accessing this wiki from the mobile site, and even more likely to have a shorter attention span. "Settings" and "Changes", they are clear, concise and in simple English. --Hydriz (talk) 13:35, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
They aren't clear, that can very easily be misinterpreted. And how is the word My confusing. Are you suggesting people don't understand the word My? -DJSasso (talk) 13:47, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
I really don't understand why you keep claiming it can be misinterpreted. The context is about the user and "Settings" is just what, 2cm away from the user's name? Having the "My" is completely unnecessary and calls for unneeded stress on the user. --Hydriz (talk) 13:54, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

So, any progress on this? I have been thinking for so long and it still does not make sense to not change the message. --Hydriz (talk) 13:20, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the progress is that this isn't something that should be changed. You are on simple wikipedia, your change would make it less simple. -DJSasso (talk) 14:31, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Can other administrators please provide their comments? --Hydriz (talk) 02:59, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Agree with Djsasso, change not needed.--Peterdownunder (talk) 12:24, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Please Block[change source]

For obvious reasons: User:Lets create sexual redirects.--3 of ♦ I go first 15:26, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Pinging Peterdownunder Auntof6 Macdonald-ross--3 of ♦ I go first 15:30, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

question...[change source]

Please, how do I find out whether I'm already "listed" or "entered" on Wikipedia"? I tried to register, and was told that my proposed "user name" was already taken. I don't know that anyone else has the name James Randi, in any language. If I'm already registered, how do I find out, please...?

— This unsigned comment was added by 2601:589:0:26e8:4d75:f611:96ca:8eea (talk • changes) at 17:01, 13 November 2015‎.

Go to Special:ListUsers to look up the username. If the username is not taken, then you can register it. However, Special:ListUsers only applies to this wiki, which means your username could be taken in another Wikipedia. Cheers. //nepaxt 21:44, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Suggestion for new change filter entry[change source]

Can we add a filter to stop unregistered users from creating user pages? I'm not talking about user talk pages, just user pages. Unregistered users aren't allowed to have their own user pages, and we've had cases recently of unregistered users creating user pages that weren't even for themselves. For example, User:Username has been created four times by one or more users using four different IP addresses. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:34, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

It's possible, but can I suggest that either:
  • The filter will only stop unregistered users from creating user pages in their own userspace, or
  • The filter will warn only, and will not prevent the action
I feel that preventing anonymous editors from creating any page in userspace is too broad an editing restriction. Chenzw  Talk  02:51, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Why not both, maybe with multiple filters if necessary? The first would take care of one issue. The second might help with the other issue, but I doubt it would stop the vandals that I've seen create such pages. I'm curious why you think my original suggestion is too broad. Why should unregistered users be creating pages in other users' user space? To me, that's a worse offense than creating in their own. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:10, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
It is just that we will be preventing unregistered users from creating pages in an entire namespace. Since no one else seems to have any objections, however, I can get started with creating the filters, hopefully finishing by tomorrow. Chenzw  Talk  06:45, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Well, this hasn't been posted for very long. It's OK with me if you want to wait to see if anyone else has any comments. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:16, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
No objections from me.--Peterdownunder (talk) 10:37, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Filter 55 is good to go (just waiting to be enabled) for unregistered users creating pages in other editors' userspace. The warning message is the generic abuse filter warning. For unregistered users attempting to create in their own userspace, we should look into crafting a warning message that is milder instead. Chenzw  Talk  13:11, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

I have enabled filter 55 since there have been no objections thus far. Will look into the filter on preventing creations in own userspace soon. Chenzw  Talk  03:18, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:27, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Filter 57 is ready (not enabled yet), and I have also created MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-unregistered-userspace‎. Please take a look. The aim is to make the warning message something friendlier and that will encourage contributors to create an account. Chenzw  Talk  09:20, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Entries suppressed in page history (this page)[change source]

Does anyone know why there are suppressed entries in the edit history of this page? --Auntof6 (talk) 17:59, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

There was personal information on ANI. //nepaxt 19:42, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Twelve entries were suppressed. I know there wasn't personal info on all of them. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:02, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
There was.--Peterdownunder (talk) 21:41, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Offensive Username[change source]

Could an admin please block User:Deez nuts got ee. It is an offensive username. Thanks. //nepaxt 17:17, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

How is it offensive? --Auntof6 (talk) 17:49, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
"Deez nuts" is a slang word for penis. //nepaxt 18:12, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
I know "nuts" is a slang term for testicles, but I didn't know this one. I'm not sure it's offensive enough to block -- we don't usually think of body parts as offensive, even parts we usually don't see. Let's see what other admins think. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:29, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Block it.--Peterdownunder (talk) 20:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Done. It's a term I wasn't familiar with, so I didn't know how offensive it was. Thanks for the education -- the things we need to learn to be admins! --Auntof6 (talk) 00:00, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Not a common one downunder, so we all learn--Peterdownunder (talk) 07:22, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Is it or isn't it ?!?[change source]

I tried to create account WGroleau. #$^%##&#$% autocorrect changed it to Groleau when I clicked submit.  Message says it is already in use.

Managed to coerce the browser to not alter Groleau and the message says it is not allowed because it is in use "on another Wiki"  That's probably me on the original Wikipedia.  But trying to "recall password" for either name gets no-such-user message.

I can be reached via Wiki (at) Lang-Learn (dot) org

Early reminder about deleting articles following end-of-year RfDs[change source]

Some RfDs are started near the end of a year but not closed until the following year. When those RfDs are closed as delete, we can't use the usual delete option because it doesn't show the correct year. To close those, we need to enter a manual reason. Just a heads-up. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:19, 27 November 2015 (UTC)