Jump to content

User talk:0xDeadbeef/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

You've got mail!

Hello, 0xDeadbeef. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:03, 12 October 2023 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Signed, 64andtim (any problems?) 01:03, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

HaleBot

Hello, 0xDeadbeef,

I think there is a problem with User:HaleBot as it hasn't generated the reports it typically does at this time of the day. User:Legoktm has been away for the past few weeks so I thought I'd reach out to you in case you could look into its operations. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:35, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

From the logs, looks like it was stuck on the "Longest active user article editing streaks" query. I've restarted the job and hopefully that can fix it. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 01:43, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
I lied. I issued a command to restart but it actually errored when I tried to restart. I've left a message on IRC, hopefully someone can help me there 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 01:51, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
You're forgiven! Thanks for looking into this. I didn't expect such a speedy response. I hope this can get resolved, I work with HaleBot's updating Database Reports but I know a lot of editors check those edit count lists. Liz Read! Talk! 03:20, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Looks like there was an outage. It should be fixed now 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 13:09, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
Hello, 0xDeadbeef,
HaleBot got back on schedule yesterday but it just missed its Empty Categories report tonight which is typically issued at 01:02 UTC. I hope it is just another glitch. Liz Read! Talk! 01:32, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
HaleBot seems to have updated that page today. Hopefully everything is back in order, but if you see any further malfunction please let me know. Thanks! 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 13:59, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
HaleBot didn't update Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories on schedule tonight. But it looks like it has been active as of a couple hours ago. Liz Read! Talk! 01:11, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
Looks like something is wrong with the job scheduling. I'll try to resolve this when I have time, but I've sent a message to Legoktm. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 11:52, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
Same for tonight. Yesterday the report was generated at 02:02 UTC so it was just an hour late so I'll try to be patient. Liz Read! Talk! 01:31, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
Still waiting for the report. I see that Legoktm was active yesterday but not today. It looks like there are other reports HaleBot is having problems with. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 03:09, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! It looks like things are back to normal. Liz Read! Talk! 04:54, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

My question at RfA

Please don't take my question at your RfA as any sort of negative assessment of your work at WP:AIV and speedy deletion. I've reviewed what you've done in the last rolling 12 months in those areas. There's been an occasional error, but we all make mistakes here and there. I applaud your willingness to stand for RfA, and the courage to do a self-nom. I know it's water under the bridge now, but an experienced nominator would have raised the lack of WP:AIV/speedy deletion activity with you before the nomination went live. Take the question as an opportunity to address this before it becomes more of an issue in the RfA. --Hammersoft (talk) 05:36, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for taking your time to reach out. It was a mistake on my part and thanks for giving me an opportunity to clarify. Hopefully my answer has cleared things up a bit, but if you need more clarification feel free to ask another question or leave a comment here, and I'll reply to my original answer to Q4 :) 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 05:49, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
No, I'm ok. Thanks for answering the question! You've probably read the various RfA advice things. Keep your head up. Try to be prompt in answering questions, but it's more important to be clear in your answers. Write them, but pause before submitting. Carefully review, and try to put yourself in the chair of the reader. Also copy your answers and paste them somewhere BEFORE you submit so you don't lose them if you edit conflict and something goes awry with the back button :) It's a stressful week, but regardless of outcome it will be in the past in seven days time. I recall seeing your name around in some discussions. I don't have a recollection of my thoughts at those times. I may or may not be able to devote time to doing a thorough review of you. I hope I do, but not promises. Best of luck! --Hammersoft (talk) 05:56, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For stepping up at RfA. I'm opposing with great reluctance, but if you don't make it this time, I hope to see you back next year with a little more experience under your belt. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:05, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 05:09, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Even though I'm neutral on your case, thanks for nominating yourself for admin. Especially in these times, we desperately need people like you to step up. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 00:47, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 05:09, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Well done, and don't stop

Hey man, you're the best; to have the guts to stand up with a self-nom. A few years ago, an edit filter manager would have just breezed in through an RfA; unfortunately, and I say this with absolutely no disrespect, some editors have less idea of what we do at the backend. Be that as it may, well done in applying for the RfA (And I will kill you if you think of withdrawing; don't!). Best, Lourdes 05:45, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. I promise I won't withdraw :) 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 07:22, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Good luck

with your RfA. I'm surprised it's actually doing decent, it looks like the community might be coming around to WP:NOBIGDEAL. And please don't withdraw. Clyde [trout needed] 18:27, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 05:20, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, good luck. You are probably not concerned with the opinions of individual opposers, but although I am still in the oppose column at this point, I am not so uneasy at the idea that your RfA will pass. Regarding the comment (and later question from someone else) on the cut-and-paste move, please feel free to ask questions on moves, page histories, WP:MALPLACED, etc. if you need help, since I have been involved those areas for a long time. Best, Dekimasuよ! 04:45, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for offering help. I'll keep this in mind when dealing with page moves in the future 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 05:20, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Edit filter helper

I want to become an edit filter helper because I love going through long term abuse cases and helping out at SPI. What should I work on to become an edit filter helper? I already know some regex however I’m not completely comfortable with it. Also nice job on having the courage to nominate yourself at RfA. Nagol0929 (talk) 20:03, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for reaching out. Looking at your contributions, I think you should keep doing what you are already doing. Edit filter helper is a high trust user right since it gives access to private information such as phone numbers or emails, therefore we usually want to see continued involvement with edit filters either through WP:EFN, WP:EF/R, WP:EFFPR or an SPI clerk can be granted the right. IMO, it is also important to not focus on specific roles of the project but rather "what things can I do to help the project" since the former can look like you are hat collecting. Though it would certainly be nice to have permissions (such as rollback) that can help people better contribute to the project, people generally want to see how you can contribute in ways you can instead of contributing for the sake of getting permissions (I personally don't think you are the latter, but asking for advanced permissions can make you appear so). Hope that helps. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 06:51, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Precious

Rust

Thank you for quality articles such as Rust (programming language) and Rust for Linux, for technical helpfulness, having tames talk page clutter, for precise analysis in a discussion, for thanking a lot and welcoming users, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

You are recipient no. 2889 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:47, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 14:57, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Filter update

Thanks for updating my filter to plug the hole with the finance scammers. I went to do the same thing and initially thought, "hmm, it should've caught those" and now just realized you'd adjusted it. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:15, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

No problem, happy to help, though I probably should have included the filter change diff when I left a message at your talk page so you didn't have to go back and forth and check when it was changed. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 14:59, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Home stretch

Ohh yeah. Get the bucket ready and get some soap in that mf, one mop coming up, don't murder anybody in the next 19 hours and we're set... jp×g🗯️ 09:45, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

For the record: I am in the camp that believes murders are bad, no matter whether it is during your RfA or not. But jokes aside, I foresee a mop being handed to you in four days time, (which should really have been 361 days ago) and I just want to say thank you for volunteering. I remember seeing your RfA page a while ago and wondering when you will run. I'm glad that you made it happen now instead of October 2025 or anything later than that. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 12:39, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Hell yeah brother!!! jp×g🗯️ 10:30, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you

Congratulations! I also wanted to say: thank you. You pushed the boundaries of what is possible at RfA. I would love to read a WP:DEBRIEF, if you can spare a moment to write one. Happy mopping! HouseBlastertalk 16:16, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

I would also like to thank you for not giving up early and letting the whole RFA play out. It meant a lot to me as someone who posted a support comment when the tally was still 42/20/5. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 17:31, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Speaking of which, MJL, when are you turning this link blue? HouseBlastertalk 17:57, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Foreshadowing... The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 21:23, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
@HouseBlaster and The Corvette ZR1: Let's not make this about me... especially when this link is just as red. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 17:57, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

A baton for you!

The admin baton
I didn't get a chance to vote in your RfA, as I've been away on vacation, but I'm glad to see you had success and I'm happy to be one of many welcoming you to the admin corps. Congratulations @0xDeadbeef! Enjoy holding this baton for the short while that you'll have it. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:03, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! Speaking of vacations, I will be out next week so I won't be able to pass this baton in time. Anyone can feel free to do it :) 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 01:44, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Sorry to be that guy. Please don't take this as an accusation of wrongdoing, I'm pinging you because we are talking about your RfA. Sorry for the hassle as well, no hard feelings hopefully. Fermiboson (talk) 08:42, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Congrats

Congrats :) welcome to your truly thankless job. Best wishes from Los Angeles,  // Timothy :: talk  09:37, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Congrats and here,

I've found this lying around while surfing Wikipedia. I'm not an admin so this definitely belongs to you!

Hey there 0xDeadbeef, I don't think I've met you before, but congrats on the adminship! Also, you might want this... 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 12:08, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Nooooo, I wanted to give him that.... The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 12:18, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Well.. Well... how about this? "This T-shirt is gifted to 0xDeadbeef by me and The Corvette ZR1." 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 13:13, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Yes please. The 🏎 Corvette 🏍 ZR1(The Garage) 13:35, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Thank you both! This T-shirt was one of the major driving forces behind me running and I'm glad that I can finally wear this :) 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 15:30, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
  • Congratulations! You survived an RFA! I came here to give you a t-shirt but see that's been done already. So, I'll just add my good wishes and say that if you ever have a question about adminning, feel free to come to my talk page. If I don't know the answer, I can point you to someone who might know. Good luck! Liz Read! Talk! 01:11, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Edit filter 1,266

What is the purpose of Special:AbuseFilter/1266? I see it everywhere. Looks like you created it last month, but I know I've seen it for longer than that. Perhaps you have other similarly named filters. Assume I know very little about edit filters. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:28, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I created it in response to this discussion: Wikipedia:Edit filter/Requested/Archive_4#Prevent curly apostrophes and quotes. I wanted to see the impact of detecting edits that introduce a curly apostrophe/quotation mark where the old wikitext did not have one. (this is undesirable as per MOS:') From the looks of it a lot of edits are caught and I think even more will be detected if we also included curly double quotes.
I was thinking that if the filter hits are not too much, someone could go in and fix the punctuation marks according to MOS, but given the number of hits this has I have disabled the filter.
As for I know I've seen it for longer than that, I'm not sure on that, this is the first test filter I have created. You might have seen other filters such as "Suffusion of Yellow test filter" though. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 13:45, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks very much for the explanation...and the disabling (I find such filters irritating, but I have a very low threshold for irritation <smiling>). No, I don't think it was the Suffusion of Yellow filter. I probably just think it's been a long time when it hasn't.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:00, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/0xDeadbeef

I have closed your BRFA as successful, congratulations. You may want to look at the admin guide to read up on any tools you are unfamiliar with. Feel free to ping me or drop me a talk page note if you have any questions. Primefac (talk) 07:29, 30 October 2023 (UTC) Whoops! That darn muscle memory getting in the way. Primefac (talk) 09:24, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

When I saw the notification, I got a bit confused since my bot already has the bot flag.. beep. boop. Thanks! 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 07:43, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Well done for pulling through, that can't have been an easy experience to handle. Schminnte [talk to me] 08:29, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Congrats! After the first 24 hours I thought you won't pass, but am glad for that to be proven wrong. VickKiang (talk) 09:04, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Congrats and good luck using the tools. Your technical skills will bring wonders to the mop corps. #prodraxis connect 12:40, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Congrats! Good to see you blocking vandals at WP:EFFP :) Galobtter (talk) 14:35, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Well, congrats for your successful RfA, so have a lolcat here. #prodraxis connect 12:42, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks all!! 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 15:30, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Congrats, Deadbeef! As a longtime RfA critic/reformer, yours is one of the brighter moments in RfA history that I’ve seen. It is extremely rare that a sub-10k candidate is tested, and it was somewhat unthinkable that this would happen. That is a testament to the character you’ve been able to demonstrate. Hang onto that character, not on Wikipedia, but IRL. ~Swarm~ {sting} 03:58, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Congratuations

Congrats on the adminship, 0xDeadbeef! — Nythar (💬-🍀) 07:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations. Glad to have had the chance to support. Best wishes. Donner60 (talk) 09:45, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Congratulations! – DreamRimmer (talk) 09:54, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Thanks all. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 10:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Congrats! The Night Watch (talk) 01:11, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations indeed. Welcome on board! — The Anome (talk) 17:55, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

HaleBot

Hello, 0xDeadbeef,

I can see by your talk page that you have a lot going on this week so I hate to bother you. But HaleBot didn't update Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories on schedule tonight. It's been doing pretty well for the past couple of weeks until tonight.

I don't keep up with RFAs these days but now that I see you are in the midst of one, I'll give it a look. You probably don't need any more advice but I just thought I'd share that I hope you hang in there, too. My own RFA was a roller coaster....first, all Supports but by day 2, the Opposes showed up and success looked doubtful. But I didn't withdraw and latecomers weighed all of the comments and gave me enough support to have a crat chat which narrowly passed. Since then, I've seen the same cycle with other candidates, most of whom decide to withdraw when the Opposes first show up. It's often a painful process to undergo that scrutiny. But a week is a long time and unless Support goes below 50% (which is not the case here), it's impossible to predict how later participants will respond to the RFA. Sometimes, there is a reaction against Opposes that results in additional Support, and unless you are heading towards the red zone, it's just a mistake to assume the worst. You might be surprised to know how many administrators who are now well-respected had very close RFAs. Good luck! Liz Read! Talk! 01:22, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Liz, thanks for the advice. I am surprised to hear that your RfA went to a crat chat considering that you are one of our best admins on the site. As for HaleBot, there are two issues, and I'm not sure if they are related to each other. One is that the old Python report code seems to be running when they really shouldn't be. The other is that for today's update, it was encountering an edit conflict for some reason. I've fixed the former, but the latter needs more investigation. I've also dug into the logs a bit and the edit conflict error seems to be quite rare. If it happens again I'll add in a retry logic. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 06:14, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
There's no correlation between a passing percentage at RfA and how good an admin is. I switched from neutral to support at Liz's RfA. And several people who opposed Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Galobtter changed their mind later once they saw him in action. Furthermore, I think having a bit of reasonable opposition is good for a newly minted admin - it gives them immediate feedback about concerns that they'll bear in mind once they start using the tools, and feel better for it, while the only opposition. I'd be interested to see the RfA tallies for admins who were desysopped for cause.
Anyway, as far as your RfA goes, while these things are never entirely possible to predict, it looks much more likely to pass than not. In my view, with no outstanding questions you can probably take a couple of days off and do something else, it'll probably do you a world of good and come back to the end of the RfA in a refreshed state of mind.
As for bots, I probably do have the technical skills to help out, though the only Python coding I've done is straightforward text processing and parsing (then again, it's what Python is really good at, I guess) and I barely have enough free time these days to keep up with writing the encyclopedia. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:15, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
In my view, with no outstanding questions you can probably take a couple of days off and do something else, it'll probably do you a world of good and come back to the end of the RfA in a refreshed state of mind. Good advice. Will probably do that.
For the bot thing, it was actually rewritten in Rust. (old Python code is not supposed to be running, and Legoktm ported all the reports that were in use to Rust a year ago) Thanks for offering help though, the code is here if you want to take a look. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 11:29, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, I wonder if having too much support at one's RfA can also cause some overconfidence. The opposition at my RfA definitely gave me a healthy caution, especially in areas people mentioned where I could cause controversy. Galobtter (talk) 00:26, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, 0xDeadbeef. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 16:06, 29 October 2023 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

- 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 16:06, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

False claim made against Wukuendo and put into V's permanent edit history

I'm not IP 101.115.65.176 nor made that edit in which being falsely accused of. More so, I believe at that time I was under a block to not edit the article, and from a report made by you. I don't understand the purpose of doing that or what is going on about that.

If you have the authority, please edit or remove that claim in V's edit history, or at least make a public statement of correction. As further attempts at punitive actions would appear to be the result of it.

Thanks for your time and consideration in advance. Wukuendo (talk) 11:27, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about. No one has accused you of editing with that IP. As for your block, you were blocked to prevent more disruption done to the page (as shown with you editing the page and reverting to maintain your preferred version without actually attempting the form a consensus on the talk page)
Over and over again you use the talk page but only to argue for why your preferred version is better. Please try to work with us here, and actually engage in the discussions. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 14:45, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
"use the talk page but only to argue for why your preferred version is better". The talk history shows how other editors and myself have reached compromises, for many months before. The article is not "my version", it is for everyone, and all the other editors and reviewers. You are editing Caleb's rewritten version, not mine. You are not working with me and other editors, by reverting their edits. That IP edited "beta", which was reverted by you, and appears to be blaming me. It gives the appearance that nobody else is allowed to do edits, except certain ones, and only adhering to Caleb's version. Please check V's edit history. Wukuendo (talk) 18:31, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
"it's not that I'm not working with you, it's that you are not working with me" - yeah ok. Please don't comment on this talk page if that's what you want to say. I'd be happy to answer any questions or advice on how to not edit disruptively. here's one: we've got so many articles and perhaps there might be an article that interests you more than V? I'd be quite sad if such an article did not exist. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 18:49, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Actually, I was working on other drafts, before a massive unexplained barrage of activity and changes on V's article after being promoted from draft. Prior to that, few to nobody seem to care about it. Isn't that interesting. Anyway, as it appears you are kicking me off your page, I will not bother it.Wukuendo (talk) 18:56, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Wow

I've seen stonewalling before, but that appears to be going for the record for doing so as smugly as possible. At least it resulted in a a couple improvements, plus it inspired me to read some of Maugham's work (what little I have read so far is good enough, he was clearly a talented writer). And as an unrelated aside, I hope you're enjoying adminship; it's always good to have new admins. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 19:58, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Though I have decided to stay off it since my last comment, I must commend you for boldly editing to try to improve (though debatable from the eyes of a few editors) the article in the first place. As for the adminship part, I'm happy to help with the backlogs with the new buttons I got :) 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 15:02, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. It's been a while since I've really been involved in a contentious (if rather low stakes) discussion, sometimes as an admin it helps to remind yourself of how it feels to be on the inside of such disputes. And always glad to have help with the backlogs, goodness knows we need it. The extra buttons really are nice to have. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 18:34, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
At least it resulted in a a couple improvements - For some reason I decided to look at the history of that page again. The reverts by the same user date back to December 2023, and if I counted it correctly, there were at least 12 reverts since then to edits that were an attempt to copyedit or improve the article. If that isn't WP:OWN behavior I don't know what is. That said, I'll just mind my own business. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 13:45, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Recent block

Hi, thanks for helping out with Sulaymaan114‎. There are several more edits and templates of theirs that may need scrutiny for ARBPIA, such as [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] (which is different from the article started under the same name), [6], etc. if you dig deep into the edit history. Editor has also started several templates on Pakistani (?) historical dynasties and added them to a number of articles, which I don't know enough to judge if they are legitimate, but I assume someone more knowledgeable will eventually notice them. Fermiboson (talk) 14:58, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

I've left them a warning for future sanctions, but don't have time to go through these you have linked and beyond. I tagged the first template as a speedy a few days ago though. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 23:13, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Editor experience invitation

Hi 0xDeadbeef :) I'm looking for people to interview here. Feel free to pass if you're not interested. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 10:21, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Done, thanks for the invitation! I was actually interested in putting in responses before getting an invitation, though I wasn't sure if that was okay.. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 11:05, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
It's totally fine for people to pitch in without a formal invitation :) Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 11:10, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Another one...

Hi 0xDeadbeef, you have handled the last couple SPIs I filed and there's a new one, Howard Hawks Survives. See the last couple threads at Talk:Elizabeth Berkley, then of course List of Ron DeSantis 2024 presidential campaign primary endorsements, which just came off page protection. I can file another SPI but these are such low-hanging fruit I hesitate clogging up the backlog along with WP:BEANS. S0091 (talk) 18:55, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Blocked. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 07:45, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! S0091 (talk) 21:50, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

HaleBot

Hello, I just wanted to let you know that HaleBot didn't issue its regular Empty Categories report as scheduled. I know that it is sometimes an hour or two late but since it looks like you've been on Wikipedia recently, I thought I'd let you know in case it's indicative of a larger issue. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:17, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Looks like it was just a hiccup. It generated the report an hour later than usual. Liz Read! Talk! 02:53, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Legoktm also created https://empty-categories.toolforge.org/, which you could use in case the bot doesn't update it in time. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 03:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for that link. Also, no Wikipedia:Database reports/Empty categories tonight. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 03:50, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
I have exams coming up this week. I will try to get to it this weekend.. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 09:24, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Well, HaleBot completely shut down for a couple days but it updated a few pages today and then nothing else. Liz Read! Talk! 01:45, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
I believe Legoktm has fixed this and replied to you on his talk page. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 11:01, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
It looks like it's gone down again. I was having trouble with WikiMedia's server, edits not going through. So perhaps it needs a restart. Liz Read! Talk! 01:08, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
Looks like it was generated one hour later than scheduled again. I will have a lot of time starting next week, so I'll look into restructuring the reports so the failure of one does not impact others. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 07:47, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Request for edit allowance on IOS 13

Hi. Recently I made edits on unsupported iOS-related articles, but under another IP range, only to find out that my changes blocked by an EF on IOS 13 twice. Can you make my edit go "live"?102.159.74.62 (talk) 18:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

 Done 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 03:06, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. And sorry if my IP address changed again. I have a poor network connection. Whenever I get disconnected and then reconnected, my address changes. I have a question: whenever my edits get blocked by an EF, like what happened to me with the pages Microsoft Edge and iOS 13, can I provide U any complaint(s)? That is, only if I received negative or no response from WP:EF/FPR(Please redirect this redlink).197.3.152.166 (talk) 03:50, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Sure, but go ask at WP:EF/FP/R first. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 10:28, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

メリークリスマス！ (Merry Christmas)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2024!

Hello 0xDeadbeef, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2024.
Happy editing,
🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 05:19, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 05:19, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 06:52, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

A9 decline at Welcome 2 Tahland

I don't think this was a good decline. The CSD template reads "where the artist doesn't have an article". This clearly refers to the primary artist(s) of the album, not any artist who happens to be featured on the album. Normally if the album isn't notable but the artist has an album, one would redirect to the artist as an ATD (hence why the CSD only applies to redlink artists). You wouldn't redirect an album to a random featured artist, so it doesn't make sense to decline on that basis. If you're not willing to delete it yourself, I hope you'll revert and let the tag stand for another admin to look at. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 10:04, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I was looking at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#A9. No indication of importance (musical recordings) which says none of the contributing recording artists has an article. If that wording doesn't follow our current consensus, then it should be changed. Anyways I don't think that article has any chance of surviving a full AfD so it is probably better to speedy? Self reverted. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 10:12, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
I read "contributing artist" as whoever you would put in the artist parameter in the infobox. Some albums have multiple main artists - think split albums or collaborative albums like Cheek to Cheek. Hypothetically, let's say that wasn't a notable album. If both Lady Gaga and Tony Bennett also weren't notable, you could A9 it. If Gaga wasn't notable, but Tony Bennett was, you couldn't A9 it. I appreciate you being willing to reconsider. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 10:31, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Disruption at Talk:SpaceX Starship

Hello! If you have any spare time, could you please review this discussion? It was created to contest the result of this RfC on the talk page, from which a clear consensus emerged to designate a recent test flight as a failure. This followed two previous RfCs, from which a similar consensus emerged.

Best regards, Yasslaywikia (talk) 14:07, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

closed discussion and left a warning for the user who made personal attacks while bludgeoning. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 16:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
I did not make personal attacks. I also will not take false accusations when I myself have been subject to personal attacks questioning my motives and character including false accusations of sealioning simply because I asked to see how a "clear consensus" was concluded from an issue that has seen 7 discussions happen and no resolution.
I was repeatedly asked for evidence yet when I provided it, it was immediately dismissed and claims made about how success is measured and how the input of the conductors of the test is taken are inconsistent with many cases on this site. For example, PDL Space who have their first Miura launch listed as a success despite meeting the criteria that starship was called a failure for. This was also sourced as being from PDL space.
JudaPoor (talk) 15:23, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for taking your time to reach out here. Your comments at the talk page has matched a lot of the checklist at the sealioning page, please recheck. About Miura 1: that seems to be a standalone instance, and inconsistencies on this site can either be deliberate or unintentional. See also Talk:SpaceX Starship/Archive 9#Flight unsuccessful: Successful as a test, but not successful as an orbital launch. Our tables generally cover the latter. That said, I don't think it would be a good idea to discuss the substance of that discussion here.
As for the personal attacks, you have indeed made personal attacks by calling people at that discussion uninformed and suggesting that they have less knowledge than you so your points must hold a lot of more weight than them.
For consensus, polling is not necessary, since Wikipedia is not a democracy. What happened in the previous discussions is that most editors agreed that those launches should be considered as failures and should be listed as so. Resolutions were clear: keep the status quo. I'm sorry if you have a lot of emotional stakes in this, but it can be quite a waste of time for other editors to relitigate if it gets brought up again, which is why you might be blocked for disruption if it happens again in the future. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 15:43, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your swift reply. As for sealioning, This is not the case. I was not sealioning for asking for proof of an actual consensus when it looks overall like a still disputed topic.
IFT 1 & 2 are not orbital flights and as I stated in the original post in the discussion I simply feel that a distinction needs to be made between developmental and operational flights. It should also be clearly stated that the failure and success isn't based on mission requirements but based on meeting a Wiki set requirement.
I also did not direct personal attacks (although I did have a number thrown at me)
I clearly stated that after I was first accused. My comment you are mentioning was in relation to NASA sources vs mainstream media. I feel it's indisputable that there is a vast knowledge gap there. I also clearly stated this in the comment after that.
I feel your last two paragraphs highlight issues with Wiki as a whole. It seems like decisions are based on opinion not fact in lots of cases such as this and the comments about wasting time on resolving conflicts feel more like a lack of effort rather than an actual issue. An editor is an editor. They can choose to respond and can voice their opinion as they want.
As for consensus, I still have yet to see any proof it's been cleared up. It doesn't seem like they agreed it seems more like a group refused to entertain the others side to the point the other side simply gave up or tried again.
Hence why it's still an ongoing issue JudaPoor (talk) 16:33, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
If you are trying to engage with me, it would be nice if you actually read my comment, otherwise we would just be talking past each other with no one coming out of it any happier. Please don't consider me as someone that needs convincing or some sort of enlightenment of what is factual. That was not my role in closing that discussion and in this discussion with you here. There is really no point in arguing about it here.
It seems like decisions are based on opinion - what an encyclopaedia includes and does not include is an editorial decision. Editorial decisions are made by humans, and not by algorithms that tell us what is true over what is not. The very existence of a disagreement over how it should be characterized should make it clear that arguments about its "closeness" to the truth holds no way on its own.
wasting time on resolving conflicts feel more like a lack of effort - Again, you probably think this is a very important issue that should be discussed over and over again until you are satisfied. Other editors may not think this way, and you have no reason to force your way, since you haven't given a sufficient justification for your side. Me personally? I really don't care about this insignificant detail in an infobox of an article that I won't read very often.
As for consensus, I still have yet to see any proof it's been cleared up. It doesn't seem like they agreed it seems more like a group refused to entertain the others side to the point the other side simply gave up or tried again. - This is also quite subjective, don't you think? If a majority of editors agree on something, that translates to consensus. Articles are not written to keep everyone happy, and engaging in a discussion should mean understanding the perspectives of other people in a discussion and acknowledging them when you make your point.
Final note: If you continue to display a failure to get the point, by either talking about the substance of the content dispute (I really don't care, please don't. It's like trying to convince an Atheist that religion A is better than religion B) or responding in a way that makes me believe you aren't really trying to engage with me here, I will kindly ask you to stop posting messages on this talk page. I would very much prefer to work on other things that are more important to me. Thanks. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 17:13, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
See also: WP:RUNAWAY. DASL51984 (Speak to me!) 19:55, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

January 2024

I've recently written Redacted II up at WP:ANI after what happened recently on the talk page for SpaceX Starship. They're getting all defensive, but if you look at the archives you'll see that they've repeatedly tried to game the system so I'm not backing down. DASL51984 (Speak to me!) 18:36, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-02

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • mediawiki2latex is a tool that converts wiki content into the formats of LaTeX, PDF, ODT, and EPUB. The code now runs many times faster due to recent improvements. There is also an optional Docker container you can install on your local machine.
  • The way that Random pages are selected has been updated. This will slowly reduce the problem of some pages having a lower chance of appearing. [7]

Changes later this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 9 January. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 10 January. It will be on all wikis from 11 January (calendar). [8][9]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

MediaWiki message delivery 01:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)


V changes/reverts

Hi, just noticed the removal of controversies on the V page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=V_%28programming_language%29&oldid=prev&diff=1193878622 Claiming "primary sources are unacceptable" and own research. Beyond that primary sources require a certain extra consideration they're not banned. This chapter however seems to mostly use secondary sources and the editor doesn't seem to be the same person as the author of the linked articles so it doesn't look like original research. Am I missing something here or was there a mistake?

Thanks Webmind (talk) 12:25, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

It was original research per WP:SYNTH and WP:OR. Yes, we do sometimes allow primary sources, but it is hard to find secondary sources that cover Xe Iaso (confirming whether they are a subject matter expert). I would err on the side of caution when we have an entire section that is sourced only to primary sources. The sentence saying despite claiming having a working C++ to V transpilation, this never materialised is plainly unsourced and seems to be original research. Even if the editor didn't publish those blog articles, combining these sources to suggest something else is original research. For example, suggesting that "most" of the features are work in progress, when no blogs have claimed as such. (The "V is for Vaporware" does say that for the features from their website, but that doesn't imply in the same way "most features" in that section implies, as in most of [features claimed on their website] vs. most of [all features]) And also, the pattern of regularly overpromising was never suggested by any of the sources (at least, not what was written explicitly in those blogs), and having an issue on the bug tracker doesn't warrant including that in the article. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 12:40, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2023).

Administrator changes

added Clovermoss
readded Dennis Brown
removed

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-03

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. [10]
  • Gadgets and personal user scripts may now use JavaScript syntax introduced in ES6 (also known as "ES2015") and ES7 ("ES2016"). MediaWiki validates the source code to protect other site functionality from syntax errors, and to ensure scripts are valid in all supported browsers. Previously, Gadgets could use the requiresES6 option. This option is no longer needed and will be removed in the future. [11]
  • Bot passwords and owner-only OAuth consumers can now be restricted to allow editing only specific pages. [12]
  • You can now thank edits made by bots. [13]
  • An update on the status of the Community Wishlist Survey for 2024 has been published. Please read and give your feedback.

Changes later this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 16 January. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 17 January. It will be on all wikis from 18 January (calendar). [14][15]
  • Starting on January 17, it will not be possible to login to Wikimedia wikis from some specific old versions of the Chrome browser (versions 51–66, released between 2016 and 2018). Additionally, users of iOS 12, or Safari on Mac OS 10.14, may need to login to each wiki separately. [16]
  • The jquery.cookie module was deprecated and replaced with the mediawiki.cookie module last year. A script has now been run to replace any remaining uses, and this week the temporary alias will be removed. [17]

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

MediaWiki message delivery 00:11, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-04

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Problems

  • A bug in UploadWizard prevented linking to the userpage of the uploader when uploading. It has now been fixed. [18]

Changes later this week

  • The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 23 January. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 24 January. It will be on all wikis from 25 January (calendar). [19][20]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

MediaWiki message delivery 01:01, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:0xDeadbeef/Archive_2&oldid=1209548206"