This is an archive of past discussions about User:Floquenbeam. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
plus ça change ... looks like my previous comment about just ignoring them would still work. Hard to do on your own talk page, I know.
I don't know about the sockpuppetry; you may be right, I have no idea. But assuming for a moment, for the sake of argument, that they arem't a sock: to some extent I think we're training new users to act like this. It would be easier to tell someone "hey, knock off the pompous fake authoritative tone" if that wasn't what they've been subjected to on their talk page. Still, looks like you're on their radar because you crossed paths with them before, so it's not a good sign they're trying to play "Gotcha". --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:07, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
I just assumed it was for Proxydicae :)
As far as being a sock, well, I have a strong suspicion that has yet to be proven wrong about who they are though I know cu doesn't jive with my assumption, behaviorally it's spot on. PICKLEDICAE🥒 20:11, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
You're probably right. Lately I seem to have lost the ability (and desire) to spot socks, but I can't recall the last time you were wrong. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:14, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Thanks Gerda! Mrs. Floquenbeam loves sunflowers. Just got back from vacation, and it taught me one thing: not being on vacation sucks. cheers. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:13, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
If I'd seen your message I'd have held off and you could have assessed it as you suggested. It just seemed like with several editors saying they thought the conversation had lost its legitimacy, and the confusion from the multiple voting, it would be better to start afresh.
Well, you closed before I commented, so of course no need to say sorry. It seems like every time I log into WP these days, there's some kind of dysfunction at the top of my watchlist, and lots of people very good at seeing the motes in other people's eyes. Bemusing. Don't run into you much these days, hope all is well. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Yes, everything's fine thank you. I just seem to have found myself inordinately busy with commitments I've made in real life, which doesn't leave enough time for WP. I even had grandiose plans to take a WP:VITAL article up to FA status this year which isn't going to happen. I'm sure it'll ease up at some point anyway! And I know what you mean about the constant dramas and mudslinging. None of which would happen if we were all gathered in a room discussing it in person. The internet brings out the crazy in people... Hope things going well for you as well. — Amakuru (talk) 08:24, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
A discussion is open to define a process by which Vector 2022 can be made the default for all users.
An RfC is open to gain consensus on whether Fox News is reliable for science and politics.
Technical news
The impact report on the effects of disabling IP editing on the Persian (Farsi) Wikipedia has been released.
The WMF is looking into making a Private Incident Reporting System (PIRS) system to improve the reporting of harmful incidents through easier and safer reporting. You can leave comments on the talk page by answering the questions provided. Users who have faced harmful situations are also invited to join a PIRS interview to share the experience. To sign up please emailMadalina Ana.
Arbitration
An arbitration case regarding Conduct in deletion-related editing has been closed. The Arbitration Committee passed a remedy as part of the final decision to create a request for comment (RfC) on how to handle mass nominations at Articles for Deletion (AfD).
The arbitration case request Jonathunder has been automatically closed after a 6 month suspension of the case.
Miscellaneous
The new pages patrol (NPP) team has prepared an appeal to the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) for assistance with addressing Page Curation bugs and requested features. You are encouraged to read the open letter before it is sent, and if you support it, consider signing it. It is not a discussion, just a signature will suffice.
I got that off the interwebs eons ago, can't recall where. And I think it was probably already really old by the time I heard it. I think at the time it was a description of the majority of the online population - something like "the internet (or usenet, or BBS, or whatever it was) if filled with eggshells armed with hammers". Still true today. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:44, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Great. A whole new curiosity to procrastinate with. A little prelim research says that it pre-dates the internet. It's apparently an old military description of a battleship. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:49, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi Floq, saw the note you removed, and I can't speak for ST but I do see varying degrees of commitment in !votes as well. It's not a (Oppose.)<(Strong Oppose.)<(Uber Oppose.); more like (Oppose.<nul>)<(Oppose, Not sure why but something seems fishy)<(Oppose, because of these relevant reasons). The later tends to contribute more to the consensus building discussion. Not all 'crats may treat things this way, but I doubt any hold it against. For example your support comment (#62 ni this RFA has commentary that is relevant to other commentary in the discussion), and I'll likely consider it a "stronger" support then if you would have said "#Support, meh." or "#Super Support, froody dude". Nutshell: For me, it's not about the superlatives - but the content. — xaosfluxTalk17:39, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
I'm sure you're right and I was interpreting ST wrong. Just in a rotten mood and probably looking for something to grump about. I don't really know SFR, so I'm not especially invested in that particular RFA, but it just strikes me as the latest evidence that this community turns on its own. I'm obviously still addicted to this toxic place, but I don't really understand why. I can't tell if my memories of it being less horrible in the past are accurate or just a false memory. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:49, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Absolutely the strengths of the arguments should carry the day, and the attaching of a bolded "strong" should make no difference. I find myself in agreement with the WP:STRONG essay.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:13, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
I saw your post, too, and largely agree with Xaosflux. The arguments made are what counts for how strong or weak someone's participation is; it doesn't matter how "strong" someone's comment is just because they say so; if someone who casts a "strong oppose" has been contradicted with evidence, their argument is weak. Similar applies to a "weak" support; if they have a lot of misgivings and say so, their support can be considered weak; but if they state "weak" but only give strong reasons to support, then their "weak support" isn't so weak after all.
Tl;dr, it doesn't matter how strong or weak you claim your comment is; how you justify it is what counts.
Yes, you're all right of course. I noticed someone had changed from Oppose to Strong oppose at the last minute, and then right after that saw ST's comments, and misinterpreted them because my annoyance at that change was fresh in my mind. my bad. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:45, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Love the rainbow. Was about to give up on finding the deer, when I re-read the message; somehow I misread it as the rainbow picture also having a deer in it, and after magnifying and searching the bottom of that image, I still couldn't see it. Reading comprehension seems to be functioning at 70% of peak, dropping by 5% a year. At this rate, will no longer be able to read anything in 14 years). --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:47, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
So sorry to have confused you, - the deer - and really very small - is in the line above. - Four musical items on 11 Sep, singing two and listening to two, the latter two pictured on my talk. I really like how the synagogue appears on its wall. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:54, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
It wasn't you who confused me, it was my own brain. You were quite accurate. Not to sound flippant, but I wonder if there is such a thing as adult-onset dyslexia. Anyway, I'd already figured out the right picture to look at, and found the deer. And, I agree, striking architecture. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:00, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
Thank you, also for your RfA rationale! The rose pic was taken on 11 Sep 2021, and this year was full of music that day, Tag des offenen Denkmals, not only singing in church and rehearsals for Verdi's Requiem, but two concerts at special places pictured, one a synagogue (pictured on its wall). Today three DYK: a piece we'll perform on Sunday, a violinist we heard in June playing the Berg Concerto, and a Youth Orchestra shaped by a conductor who recently died. Almost too much of a good thing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Today, we sang old music for two choirs at church, pictured, scroll to the image of the organ of the month of the Diocese of Limburg (my perspective), and if you have time, watch the video about it - If my memory is right we looked at the church, - is it? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:03, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
Hi Gerda. I hope you don't interpret my sometimes slow/nonexistent lack of response to every post as rude or disinterested. I do appreciate the stubborn kindness in the face of everything else I see around here lately, even if all I have to say back sometimes is "Hi Gerda". --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:52, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
I hope it was the phrase "stubborn kindness" that caused the smile? I have to admit, I liked that phrase as soon as it popped into my head. Floquenbeam (talk) 16:47, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
(after edit conflict:) it was "the stubborn kindness in the face of everything else I see around here lately" coming from that crat chat talk. There was also a discussion on classical music that bothered me - but was suddenly resolved today (and I don't know why). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:52, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Following an RfC, consensus has been found that, in the context of politics and science, the reliability of FoxNews.com is unclear and that additional considerations apply to its use.
The Articles for creation helper script now automatically recognises administrator accounts which means your name does not need to be listed at WP:AFCP to help out. If you wish to help out at AFC, enable AFCH by navigating to Preferences → Gadgets and checking the "Yet Another AfC Helper Script" box.
Arbitration
Remedy 8.1 of the Muhammad images case will be rescinded 1 November following a motion.
Hello Floquenbeam, I'm having an issue with an Arabic user from Tunisia who keeps editing his country's football team's article. The article has always been written poorly (translated online or written by a non-native English speaker) with too much unnecessary content in the history section. I trimmed and copyedited it in August. For other countries' football/soccer teams, the history section is just an overview, and he keeps insisting reinstating the unnecessary content. I told him to stop edit warring and thankfully he listened, although he did it way too much. He has reinstated it again, so I removed it. He even once edited Senegal's football article and I had to revert it. The World Cup is 1.5 months away and we need as many soccer/football articles looking as good as possible. Should we block this user and/or ban him from editing articles relating to football/soccer? Should he stick to the Arabic Wikipedia? Thanks, Nearly but not perfect (talk) 08:55, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
@I'm not perfect but I'm almost: I saw this the day you posted it, but couldn't do anything at the time, and then the orange bar disappeared and I forgot. I'll take a look later today if I can. One prelim question: are there any talk page posts by either one of you, or are you only communicating thru edit summaries and/or templated warnings? --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:00, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
I communicated with him in August after editing the Tunisian article. He was angry at me for "ruining his work", when I repeatedly told him that it is poorly written and had way too much information in the history section. History sections of soccer teams are supposed to be just an overview unless there's no article. He kept arguing when I told him almost everything was unnecessary, and finally agreed to stop editing it over a week later, saying "Don't text to me again" (I don't even have his phone number... really??). He reinstated what I removed roughly a month later, and I restored the original version whilst having their recent results played in September. I also nominated his "History of the Tunisia national football team" article for deletion as it was written very similarly to the pre-copyedited versions of the main article. Nearly but not perfect (talk) 17:08, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
I think we're lumbering inefficiently towards the right solution; a scaled-back history section that matches other articles and doesn't violate UNDUE, and a separate History of the Tunisia national football team as a breakout article. The problem with lack of attribution is easily solved. In general, I don't see too many egregious errors by either one of you, just the natural self-reinforcing escalation of annoyance that is difficult to solve. Personally, I would suggest minimizing templated messages like the edit warring one, as they almost always inflame people, but it's a common thing to do and many others disagree with me. I'd also say, in general, that once things start getting heated, edit summaries are no longer the best place to comment, and a talk page discussion is warranted. If you find yourself in a similar dispute in the future, a quick message at WT:FOOTY like "hey, I've got a disagreement with another editor on Tunisia national football team, could some of you comment at Talk:Tunisia national football team and help us iron it out?" can often work simply. No guarantees, of course.
Anyway, unless the material is re-introduced to the main article again, I'm not sure there's any adminning to be done. Have I missed anything? Does that help at all? --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:39, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
I went with the revdel. At first I thought it was another troll like before. Seeing they were an admin with over a decade and a half of experience threw me for a loop.ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:34, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Hey, she is a great user. I am sure the account is compromised. Have you notified ArbCom? It's an admin account, which you probably noticed already. JehochmanTalk05:13, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
That's what I thought/hoped too, but it's pretty clear now that it wasn't a compromised account, and yep, it's now at ArbCom. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:31, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Rather than post more verbiage at ANI and A/R/C, I'll move the discussion here. I still think there's no rush to press forward with a desysop, as I now think one will probably naturally happen in due course in a similar trajectory to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Carlossuarez46. I suspect the arbs are privately discussing this right now, and I think we'll hear something one way or the other in the next couple of days. As nobody is calling for an unblock (and I admit I was sort of playing devil's advocate a bit on A/R/C) and if that remains the case, then my interpretation of the policy is "Editors who are indefinitely blocked by community consensus, or remain indefinitely blocked after due consideration by the community, are considered "banned by the Wikipedia community"" and who on earth is going to argue that a banned user can't be desysopped?
The main point is, I think, the issue is important (people need to be reassured in no uncertain terms this is not how administrators behave) but it doesn't need to be done urgently, if that makes sense. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)14:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
It does make sense; I understand, I think I just disagree. I see value in not dragging this out. First, it sends a message that this kind of bullshit is simply not tolerated, and sends it more clearly that a desysop down the road. Second, it prevents the attractive nuisance of the RFAR discussion. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:31, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Sometimes, I think discussions like this can't be shut down easily, otherwise people just start them up elsewhere. You just have to let people have their say until they run out of steam, particularly as people in different time zones wake up / get back from work. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)14:52, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Maybe. But I also think there's a benefit to limiting the extent of an already successful trolling. Anyway, it's not really in our hands. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:11, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
I don't understand her situation. The edit looks just like a compromised account. Whether that's true or not, the account should have its admin rights removed until all the facts come out, and a considered decision can be made. JehochmanTalk02:41, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Jehochman, various evidence has emerged that she has been a transphobe for a long time, and just blew her stack over this particular RfA for some unknown reason. I am just a rank and file administrator without advanced permissions, but I see no evidence beyond understandable wishes and hopes that this is a compromised account. A truly sad story, but our main concern should be for the victims of the vicious personal attacks, not for the perpetrator. Cullen328 (talk) 03:00, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Each of us should be concerned for our friends. If a friend makes a mistake we try to help them fix it. If a friend is attacked, we try to support them. I don't know how to fix this mess, but maybe we can figure it out. In this case I am friends with both the "perpetrator" and the "victim." JehochmanTalk03:11, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
At the very least, Jehochman, you should stop putting forward the "compromised account" theory unless you can furnish some actual evidence. Also, please be careful to avoid any further comments that could be construed as excusing an exceptionally cruel personal attack. That is exactly what it was. Cullen328 (talk) 03:28, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion
In your statement, you missed my favourite - "Arbcom sometimes finds it hard to let a case request go without imposing at least some mark of their authority"... those scoundrels! — Amakuru (talk) 21:01, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
I think there's a lot of people viewing ArbCom filtered thru their own individual custom-made lenses.
Also, I feel like everyone except me knows what this "private" stuff is about, even before Barkeep's promised explanation. Probably on Discord or IRC or some other technology I don't understand. Feel like I'm the only one not to know. :( --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:17, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
I have no clue either, but then I barely follow any off-wiki stuff and even at the on-site drama boards I'm only an occasional visitor, so many of these things pass me by... — Amakuru (talk) 21:51, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
Fresh new "policy": Cynical, experienced Wikipedia editors are no longer permitted to edit articles about wars. Enthusiastic, passionate newbies can be counted on to do a much better job. Cullen328 (talk) 06:23, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
TBAN
Hello. Your superimposed topic ban [1] is a bit incomprehensible, please clarify two issues:
Topic ban for "anything related to indigenous people anywhere in the world" is mis-defined, because it affects everyone (each person) in the Old World. I'm a Pole, so I'm also an indigenous people of Poland (please see - for example - Indigenous_peoples#Europe). Does this mean that I cannot edit articles about Poles? Please improve this opinion or adding an explanation of exactly what groups of the population case in this case. I recommend it in this case just using "anything related to Australian indigenous people", because there is no justification for blocking me from editing articles concerning 86% of the world's population.
I can't edit Australia-related articles, but what if I see an error in an article? Do I have the right to report this to the admin or on the article talk page? Subtropical-man(✉ | en-2)21:24, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
"Incomprehensible"? I don't think you actually readIndigenous peoples#Europe, which specifically says Poles are not considered indigenous people. I'm comfortable leaving the wording of the topic ban as-is. We can defer to our article Indigenous peoples if you're unclear on a specific topic. Per WP:Topic ban, see WP:BANEX for exceptions to a topic ban. If you saw obvious vandalism, you could theoretically fix it. If you see something you just think is wrong, you have to leave it completely alone. You cannot bring up things you just think are wrong to admins, other editors, or talk pages. You are not allowed to edit talk pages of articles you're topic banned from. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:38, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
I lied about the chances, of course. It was never better than 5%. Could see that result coming, but nothing really I could think of to do to stop it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:26, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Proposed decision posted for Reversal and reinstatement of Athaenara's block
Today is Erntedank in Germany, thanksgiving, and we celebrated our village's 650th anniversary, and had the dress rehearsal for Verdi's Requiem with an interesting band of marimba, piano, horn, bass, timpani and drum, - concert tomorrow, our national holiday. Seeing a pic I took on the Main page was also a nice harvest. - I would have waited but this tree is in Rüdesheim ;) -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:17, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Busy weekend! Hope it all went well. Unless I'm misreading the scale, that tree trunk is massive; I wonder how old it is, and how much it has seen? --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:49, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Concert went well! Music still on my mind, which is a mixed blessing :) - The tree is 200+ years old - there's a plaque but I took the pic last year and don't remember exactly. So it's older than Germany. - Today's pics from Lorch, Rheingau. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:45, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
new day, another pictured DYK (but not pictured by me this time): look at power work tensions (if you translate) - hiked to Jo'berg again, thought of you, had the same signature dish ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:44, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
today's DYK: two facts from the two concert of this years Rheingau Musik Festival I liked best, both a cappella singing. If you follow the songs, you see a circus, where I performed singing, and in the end the whole tent joined for Dona nobis pacem. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:22, 19 October 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for bringing an end to the recent issue I was involved with on the noticeboard. I appreciate a line being drawn under the matter. SquireJames (talk) 19:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
An RfC is open to discuss having open requests for adminship automatically placed on hold after the seven-day period has elapsed, pending closure or other action by a bureaucrat.
Tech tip: Wikimarkup in a block summary is parsed in the notice that the blockee sees. You can use templates with custom options to specify situations like {{rangeblock|create=yes}} or {{uw-ublock|contains profanity}}.
in the next week, anyone in this thread says anything remotely critical about anyone else in the thread, let me know and I will block them for a week....@Le Marteau:, you're about one nasty comment away from being blocked indef
...
Your sea lioning was pathetic and uncomprehending. If I have to read another line from the likes of you, with your faux concern and your hidden agendas to get the likes of me to finally STFU and stop attacking "Bon Courage", I think I'm going to vomit - @Le Marteau
Hey Floq! Haven't rapped atcha in a while. I don't know if you were aware, but they added a really cool new feature:
Send password reset emails only when both email address and username are provided. This improves privacy and helps prevent unsolicited emails
It's on the first page of user profile. Makes it much more difficult for bad actors to harass editors with false password resets. –xenotalk15:23, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Floq, please let's not fall out over this. We're both doing what we think is right on the project and maybe I am having a grumpy day, who knows. But it's not every day you wake up to find people accusing you of casting aspersions and generally causing mayhem. In retrospect I shouldn't have brought the issue up, it would seem, and I only did so because it's something that irks me, even if it doesn't irk you. Just for the record though, this really isn't commonplace at ITN. We all tweak the template at will, obviously, but I don't know of others who regularly reinstate reverted changes, and the only other instance I can think of is the case Black Kite alluded to in the thread. As I said, I'd like clarity one way or the other, that's all. Cheers anyway, and I hope you're having a good day aside from all this drama. — Amakuru (talk) 18:41, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
This user is not God Emperor of Wikipedia but might like to be some day.
All I can fall back on is my fuzzy memory, because I'm not going to go diff hunting. So it's possible you're right. But my recollection is definitely that patterns like the one you show have happened more frequently than that. It's not that it doesn't bother me, so much as it seems common enough that it doesn't make sense to focus on Stephen. If I was God Emperor of WP, I'd change how pretty much all main page areas work. ITN seems, to me, second only to AFD fourth only to AFD, AN, and ANI, in how relentlessly unfriendly it is. I don't like those areas anymore, as you may know. I tried yesterday to dip my toe back into ERRORS and ITN, to make up for 1% of the loss of a main page regular admin, and both left me with a bad taste in my mouth, and the feeling that every single incremental improvement required a long discussion with dismissive comments. It just seems wrong-footed to bring it up at ACN. I certainly didn't mean to say you were casting aspersions or mayhem, and looking back, I'm pretty confident I didn't say anything like that. Tho I suppose you're just saying others did, which is why you might be in a bad mood. Anyway, I wasn't planning on falling out. Water under the bridge I hope. Have a better day. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:00, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
You were in the States?! I had no idea. That's a beautiful area. We had a summer vacation about 100 miles north of there. Hope it was as fun as it looks. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:17, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
I'm still there, and it's great, memory lane all over, last full day though, going to the City once more, with another rehearsal - but only listening in, they are professionals (family member second from right in lowest row) - in the end. - I just saw TPA removed from Martin, which saddens me a lot. My understanding is that he had no hope to get unblocked until the copyvio investigation was over, and exchanging thoughts about improvements for a future with the blocking admin, - why this?? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for your help in the matter and successful even! - A few more pics to come, but I'm back home and had too little sleep, so it may take another day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:17, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Restored the November thread. It'll stay til the end of the month now, but next month I'll start adding a {{DNAU}} template at the top when you first add a new thread. Running out the door; we were going to just have a small boring Thanksgiving with the four of us this year, but got a last minute invite to visit some friends who were planning to do the same, and share it with them instead. (And unlike most people - present company excepted - I actually like these friends...) I know it's not Thanksgiving over there, but still hope you have a great day today. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:48, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
An RfC on the banners for the December 2022 fundraising campaign has been closed.
Technical news
A new preference named "Enable limited width mode" has been added to the Vector 2022 skin. The preference is also shown as a toggle on every page if your monitor is 1600 pixels or wider. When disabled it removes the whitespace added by Vector 2022 on the left and right of the page content. Disabling this preference has the same effect as enabling the wide-vector-2022 gadget. (T319449)
Arbitration
Eligible users are invited to vote on candidates for the Arbitration Committee until 23:59 December 12, 2022 (UTC). Candidate statements can be seen here.
The arbitration case Stephen has been opened and the proposed decision is expected 1 December 2022.
A motion has modified the procedures for contacting an admin facing Level 2 desysop.
Miscellaneous
Tech tip: A single IPv6 connection usually has access to a "subnet" of 18 quintillion IPs. Add /64 to the end of an IP in Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.
This isn't an urgent request. You were the acting administrator, so that's why I am asking you about this. There is a long time editor and admin who was blocked, desysoped, and I think banned in mid-October 2022. You were the one who did the blocking. I think an official investigation was held then she was banned. Her user name begins with A, crud, now I have forgotten it. It is something like Athena but lengthier. Might you or someone consider hat noting her user talk page?
Here's why I say this: Most of Athena...'s user talk page is a lengthy to-and-fro that makes everyone involved appear not-at-their-best, i.e. lots of vitriol. Also, the name of the person who was the focal point of the entire thing, but who was not an instigator of anything, is mentioned. That might be embarrassing to her. Her first name (Wikipedia user name, I assume, although it isn't linked, but I guess, hope it isn't a real life name!) is Isabella. She wanted to be an admin. Perhaps she is now, idk. At a minimum, I think her name should probably be deleted from Athena...'s user talk page as a matter of privacy. FeralOink (talk) 14:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi FeralOink. My inclination is to leave it alone, just because (a) the drama has died down now (one month since last post), and hatting the discussion might actually restart an argument about the hatting, and (b) it's one of many places we aired our collective dirty laundry in public in this dispute, and none of those places are hatted/deleted.
That said, if you strongly disagree, feel free to ask another admin; I don't feel strongly enough to prevent anyone else from doing it. I just think it's unnecessary and has a potential to backfire. Floquenbeam (talk) 18:55, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Okay, I understand. I wasn't involved in any of it, so I'll defer to your judgement on this. Thanks for getting back to me with a response so quickly!--FeralOink (talk) 00:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
The Mandarax Barnstar of Excellence
The Mandarax Barnstar of Excellence
I am pleased to award this long-overdue MBE to you in recognition of your outstanding contributions to Wikipedia. Your input is always very thoughtful, reasonable, intelligent, and logical, and you manage to keep a sense of humor. Your work has been exemplary!
I've been meaning to give this to you for a really long time, but when you jumped in to defend me, I knew I had to finally go for it. Thank you very much for that, and, more broadly, for EVERYTHING (hehe) you do around here! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM22:50, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
You're welcome, and thanks again. With my crude image-editing skills, that barnstar took me a long time to construct, from an MBE and a generic barnstar. BTW, any stalkers who wonder about that "(hehe)" after the all-caps word, see the thread I linked to. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM07:04, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Rather mean
The first part of what you wrote is a welcome addition at RFA, the second part hurts. I certainly can change my mind. I have been contributing here for some time without incident. I have reformatted my question there. I had much respect for you after you intervened in a dispute a while back. I also supported your admin candidacy. I just stopped by to say it is not necessary to make hurtful comments about an editor just because of a question at RFA. cheers and happy holidays. Lightburst (talk) 22:48, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
It's been my observation, several times, that when you grab an end of a stick, you don't let go of it. Whether that's a character flaw or a character strength is up to you. Perhaps I worded it too strongly, so I'm sorry that my thoughtless wording made you feel bad. But the overall point, more elegantly worded, still applies. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:26, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!
Get well soon! I wish you and your loved ones a Merry Christmas and a prosperous new Year. Best regards RV (talk) 09:40, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Darwinbish is irresistibly attracted by the Darwinbish repellent and makes off with it, leaving a Floquenbeam repellent in its place.darwinbish21:29, 23 December 2022 (UTC).
Wishing you and yours a Happy New Year, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free and may Janus light your way. Ealdgyth (talk) 13:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
HappyNewYear, Floquenbeam
Chris Troutman (talk) — is wishing you a HappyNewYear! Welcome the 2024. Wishing you a happy and fruitful 2024 with good health and your wishes come true! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! May the 2024 go well for you.
Today, we sing for a Marian feast, I learned that Yvonne Ciannella died, the soprano who impressed me in my first night at the opera, and as she died in March, sadly no Main page reverence is possible, - at least she had a good DYK, at a time when opera singers were considered interesting. I'm proud today that Christiane Hörbiger made it to that corner, and happy that we celebrate the birthday of Jean Sibelius again. - I heard an excellent Christmas concert yesterday, by Tenebrae, and a short excerpt of them singing "Deo gracias" is also linked from my talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:17, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
O dear! Get well! Both sick and bored are no good options. (I know, being sick with a cough.) - In whatever condition: enjoy the season, dreaming of peace! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:37, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
It's option 3; too bored to edit. I'm feeling fine now, but I'm stuck in a room with Mrs. Floquenbeam (also with COVID), and we're going stir crazy. But with healthy people in the rest of the house, we're being good and following the Rules. Hope you get better soon enough to enjoy Christmas! Floquenbeam (talk) 22:55, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Voting for the Sound Logo has closed and the winner is expected to be announced February to April 2023.
Tech tip: You can view information about IP addresses in a centralised location using bullseye which won the Newcomer award in the recent Coolest Tool Awards.
I have edited here for 16 years, with more than 200,000 edits, and have rarely encountered a more combative user, as User:Danceswithedits if they continue to make baseless accusations and personal attacks, please would you consider revoking talk page access? I accepted their draft United States Civil Rights Trail at WP:AFC, and a number of other users reverted the "extra" content he edit warred to include but I seem to be taking the flack for it and it's wearing me down! Theroadislong (talk) 19:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I see Ivanvector has declined the latest unblock request, and said they would revoke talk page access if the next post wasn't a legit request. So yes, I'll remove talk page access if they do it again, and (since I'm often not around) you can probably ping Ivanvector if I seem to be AWOL. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:28, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Howdy. In regards to this revert, no worries, I'll get out of the middle of this since I am not an admin. But you may want to chat/sync up with BusterD, who gave the user a final warning for removing talk page comments. I feel like it might be a bit confusing for one admin to go "you will be blocked if you remove this" and another admin to go "actually, it's OK to remove this". Hope this helps. Thanks and have a great day. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:40, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Ugh; I wasn't aware of BusterD's comments, shitty timing on my part. I'll try to go limit the damage, thanks for pointing it out. I guess my main concern, which is much more widespread than this case, is that when someone shows up at ANI and becomes visible, while they're in the middle of a stressful situation (of their making or someone else's making), they start getting flooded with "please sign your posts", "please indent your posts properly", or "you have to use strikeout, not removal". I feel like the time to teach them these issues is when they aren't stressed. Thanks again for the note, I'll go try to fix the problem I made. Floquenbeam (talk) 19:45, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
No worries. Did you cause a problem? Maybe I left one behind. If so I owe you. The user is engaging, admitting they have a part and taking a short break (at least the last few hours). On the merits I have no interest; I hope in my final warning I correctly explained that removing their own comments was generally fine, but removing others was not. I was trying to get the user to stop the blanking and they seem to be willing to listen to reason. BusterD (talk) 20:04, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
It's actually a timely discussion, because I'm working my way through the article wizard page today in preparation for the meeting tonight. I wish there was some way we could require basic sourcing in order to even save a draft, emphasizing VERIFY over BOLD (primarily we are an encyclopedia, not a social media). Mere creation is for the sandbox. BusterD (talk) 20:10, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Not really a problem, just some mixed signals. But it looks like NL and you and Cullen and Dumuzid are all OK with this, so no harm no foul. Cheers. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:03, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
13 years?! I've been an admin for almost 60% of WP's existence! With every passing year, I'm more and more surprised I haven't been desysopped for cause. Anyway, thanks Chris. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Voting in the 2023 Community Wishlist Survey will begin on 10 February 2023 and end on 24 February 2023. You can submit, discuss and revise proposals until 6 February 2023.
Tech tip: Syntax highlighting is available in both the 2011 and 2017 Wikitext editors. It can help make editing paragraphs with many references or complicated templates easier.
Thanks for the New Years wishes! Considering I didn't really do anything around WP last year, it's nice to still be thought of. All the best to you and yours this new year. Here's hoping (at least for me) that it's pretty much nothing like 2022! --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:54, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
I just saw you explaining something to a disappointed user, - what do you mean not really anything? For 2023, beginning in Ukrainian colours. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:03, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Gerda, if you remember my youngest, you might enjoy knowing that starting yesterday, she's in Genova for a month. I'm concerned she may never return; she sent a selfie at breakfast at an outdoor table on a steep and narrow brick-paved street with focaccia and a cappuccino (what she calls her first "real" cappuccino), and I don't think I've ever seen her so happy. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:22, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
today, less pointy: a composition from a remarkable 2022 concert, the sad record of four articles about people who recently died on the Main page at the same time, and singing for Epiphany --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:37, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
That is a sad record. Thanks for working on those articles; although I'm confused and don't see four. In our house, epiphany is "dia de los reyes", which is treated as kind of the last gasp of Christmas, rather than the first day of epiphany. Taking down the Christmas tree this evening, as we always do on the weekend after the 6th... --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:39, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm surprised, given how many people I've blocked for socking or similar in that area, that I managed to dodge that case. And I'm quite thankful too—that's going be a proper mess. Reaper Eternal (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Following a request for comment, the Portal CSD criteria (P1 (portal subject to CSD as an article) and P2 (underpopulated portal)) have been deprecated.
The Terms of Use update cycle has started, which includes a [p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.
That was an old one, but fitting for the occasion. Bach entered his post in Leipzig mid-1723, and then produced a new cantata practically every week, more chances, but more than I can meet. I just prepared Valentine with Alte Liebe. I read the book to my dad. I met the woman author in an interview event, and she - asked what she was most proud of - said that she liked to have good relations to all her former husbands. Which included the one with whom she wrote the book, alternating chapters, and she said that both really had to live with the situation the other created. There's a yt of them reading it to an audience, also alternating. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
I think such a wish is mainly aspirational in the big picture, but practical individually, and is still worth a shot. Changing the world incrementally is admirable and underappreciated work. Floquenbeam (talk) 20:18, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
thank you, - perhaps speak individually on the specific article talk, Robert le diable? - today: two women whose birthday we celebrate today, 99 and 90! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:37, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Your userpage
Every once in a while I read your userpage for entertainment. Still find much of it funny, even in reruns. That said, if you'll forgive a fussy grammarian, "Mrs. Floquenbeam, while watching my daughter and I both "playing" at the same time" should be "Mrs. Floquenbeam, while watching my daughter and me both "playing" at the same time" (emphasis added by me). For some reason I want to sign off as "Cheers!", even though we're both American. I think it comes from watching too much British TV.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Done, although grudgingly, as explained in the edit summary. It doesn't change much, so I'm glad it holds up well in reruns. I assume the thing you find the most humorous is the fact that I actually keep thinking the Mariners are going to get out of their slump "this" year? Floquenbeam (talk) 17:30, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Well, do you consider "my daughter and I/me" to be the object of the verb "watching", or do you consider it to be the subject of the verbal phrase "both playing at the same time"? Would you feel differently if it wasn't the (nonfinite) "playing", but rather the finite "play"? That is, would you consider "She watches my daughter and me play" still to be more correct than "she watches my daughter and I play"? Because "my daughter and I play" is undoubtedly correct.This is a quagmire, a linguistic minefield--no, let me correct that. It's a minefield for linguistic pedants (if the shoe fits...), not for grammarians--at least not for descriptive grammarians, like me. ;) Drmies (talk) 18:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
I don't even know what a descriptive grammarian is, but this all could be avoided if Floquenbeam said "Mrs. Floquenbeam, while my daughter and I were both "playing" at the same time." Or Floq could just put it back the way it was now that you've given him permission. In any event, I don't think any of you know squat about anything other than sports. I thought the Mariners were a football team.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:57, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Re: "I don't think any of you know squat about anything other than sports": That's not true. We know squat about late 18th century poetry. And sports. Floquenbeam (talk) 19:02, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Fourthords, I suspect so, but I don't want to step on the toes of TheSandDoctor, because they're an SPI clerk and probably know what else besides undoing that tag might be needed. I'd suggest asking on TSD's talk page. I didn't make any determination in that ANI thread, I just noted that ArbCom has unblocked Lettler so they weren't HughD a sock. Probably not the world's most urgent task, since everyone except Lettler is blocked, and they haven't edited in 2 months. Floquenbeam (talk) 22:36, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Details about the summary page, the two phases of evidence, a timeline and other answers to frequently asked questions can be found at the case's FAQ page.
Yeah, yesterday I was in a similar place; even when reverting his unblock, I thought it possible he could fairly easily salvage this. Now I'm (slightly, rhetorically, don't panic) tempted to siteblock pending resignation of the admin bit, as a reading of consensus at ANI for a de facto community desysop process. I have little patience for the ANI/ArbCom flu, and react more strongly than is probably justified when someone just thumbs their nose at us. The name sounded vaguely familiar, but I was unfamiliar with Dbachmann; who knew we had a racist (or, at least, racism-enabling) admin for 20 years? The ArbCom version of RBI would be appropriate. The German WP can have him. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:03, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Floq says: Probably shouldn't make me uncomfortable that this isn't in its own section. But it does, so adding one
In another ANI moment, I agree with your assessment on the IP issue, but please have a read of the user pages of some of the involved editors... there's one that might not be coping with this. CatfishJim and the soapdish19:26, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
It turned out not to be as scary as I interpreted it (not a slam on you, Jim, I just read into the first message that "something really bad was happening", whereas a more reasonable response was "oh, good point"). I can drop you a short email explaining, just to put your mind at ease. Floquenbeam (talk) 20:48, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Probably I showed it to you before but can't remember when and why. - I don't want to get a new user whose English is limited in trouble, but perhaps check out Psalm 13 and 118, where they - not a singular they but two user names - tried to add something from Mazedonia. I think I made it acceptable now, but didn't like that I tried to explain as patiently as I could, and instead of listening the first user's talk was blanked, and the original stuff returned by the other. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:11, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
It's possible - a few clues, although it's really hard to know because of the language issue and lack of discussion - that they're trying to "delete" their old account and switch to the new. So I'd be tempted to not worry too much about the sockpuppetry issue. The edit warring and competency issues are more worrying. I've watchlisted the two Psalms pages, and if they revert again without discussion I'll get involved. Or ping me if I don't seem to have noticed. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:45, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Fine with me. They tried once today, and I issued a warning on the second account, where the edit came from. Let's take it from there. If behaviour improves I can replace that warning by a welcome template ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:15, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
I think that it appears to be Tim riley acting like an asshole. I don't know if he's usually like that, or has been recently emotionally wounded in some way and is lashing out, but he doesn't seem open to feedback, so I guess we're stuck in an imperfect world, since (knowing you) you won't want to escalate. Floquenbeam (talk) 15:14, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
In better days, we wrote articles together, The Company of Heaven, of all titles. Right now, we do husband and wife, he the husband, I the wife, not without irony, which I love ;) - I wrote a FAC support for the husband, and found the author normal (after initial grumbling about me making changes, in the end he asked me to make some!). I don't want to take him to arbcom but that's exactly where it sits: participants should behave civilly, RfCs should be announced neutrally. To compare a group of free editors to an army, and then that army, and - worse - saying it could also have been Russian, - words fail me, much worse than not civil (and I'd take from a stranger better than someone with whom I just worked). BUT: since Voceditenore commented in the discussion in question today, I feel much better about the outcome. And no, we are no a group taking orders, just the community. - I stood for the common readers from the beginning of the problems in 2013m when {{infobox opera}} was introduced and hated by some but is now in 1,5k+ articles. This too shall pass. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
sharing impressions from vacation on Madeira 20-30 March, pics now at 24 Mar from the peaks (I escaped the pocket) - the RfC with the non-neutral invitation to fight was closed, and went rather peacefully - what can we learn from it? - I saw today that Brian Boulton added an infobox to Imogen Holst in 2014, edit summary "risk" - should it still be a risk in 2023 to follow his example? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:09, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
I don't like to compare - both are great. Trail markings are better on Madeira, but even there you can get lost. The Canaries is a broad term, - comparing just Madeira and La Palma, both revisited which means a lot, both with discoveries the second time better than the first time. On Madeira: enjoying the less touristy north more, but pics of a fancy place in the south to come - keep watching. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
The rollback of Vector 2022 RfC has found no consensus to rollback to Vector legacy, but has found rough consensus to disable "limited width" mode by default.
"Such comments are surely not what Arbs want during the case request; and that doesn't seem like anything they'd welcome at the evidence phase either." I'm curious as to your view of why not, esp. case request? ARC strikes me as the obvious place for the community to express loss of trust? Levivich (talk) 20:22, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
I've seen, several times (please forgive the lack of research to prove it) Arbs say (paraphrasing based on bad memory) "In comments in a case request, we only want to see diffs of wrongdoing". Which, of course, doesn't happen, but it's still apparently what at least some of them would like. I imagine RFAR ARC (I don't like "ARC" because it's not what I grew up with, but I see now RFAR doesn't actually point to where it used to point) would be the place to link to any such thread. I think this might be cleaner than everyone haphazardly mentioning lack of trust intersprsed with diffs, arguments with other commenters, points of order, etc. Floquenbeam (talk) 20:31, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
From what I understand, comments during the request phase ought to be focused on whether there is sufficient reason to proceed with a case. Thus a full analysis in support of or against enacting remedies isn't desirable (as it ought to wait until a case is actually opened), but it's helpful to provide enough info to show "actions X should be investigated further" or "actions X don't warrant further investigation". In a situation where editor trust is being evaluated, I think it is reasonable to submit comments on the case request making a preliminary argument regarding trust, and I think it is also reasonable to submit more detailed diffs and analysis in the evidence and workshop phases. I think there are practical limits in the number of participants whose input can all be taken into account beyond a headcount, but that's true no matter where the discussion is held. isaacl (talk) 21:20, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
I saw your notice at the top of the page. This is just so you know in case the discussion gets archived before you see the notifications, I pinged you at ANI in relation to this discussion about Justanother2. Context is in relation to your comments at this February 2022 ANI thread involving the same editor, where you asked to be informed if the user's behaviour was causing problems.
No worries if you're not about, and don't see this until after it's been resolved in some way. Just wanted to let you know the context for the notifications :) Sideswipe9th (talk) 20:11, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
I see things have changed since this note, and JA2 has now been indeffed as a sock. Thanks for the note, but I guess events have overtaken me. Floquenbeam (talk) 21:27, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
I suppose there are some minor similarities, but there are very significant differences in state of mind and in magnitude. Jimbo being Jimbo is sometimes embarrassing to the tiny subset of humans that are Wikipedians; Elon being Elon is a catastrophe for many of the people who worked for him, and has actual detrimental effects on society as a whole. Except the rockets, I love the rockets. I suspect that if I suddenly became famous, I'd probably be even more clueless about how to do it than Jimbo is. I just think I'd have more humility and self-awareness, and would be too scared of looking dumb to do the things he does. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:40, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
The fact you worry that if suddenly famous, you'd be even more clueless, is a very strong argument for the likelihood of the opposite. Valereee (talk) 19:11, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
hahahahaha...well, probably that too. I mean, there are a lot of ways you could get famous, but most of them involve doing terrible things. Valereee (talk) 19:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
Yep.
"Why didn't someone let me know?!"
I just hopped over after seeing your post on IH's page, and I was going to try and say something witty about how these situations play out. It was at that point that I saw the large MEH banner and though, "yeah, that's about right."
WP:YOU'REONLYMAKINGITWORSE? A block would almost be necessary for something like that because, much like warnings, people don't do or say things thinking they're wrong.
I envision it like someone piloting a hot air balloon that is drifting towards danger while people on the ground shout at them to come down because they're going to hit power lines. They yell back that they know what they're doing, they're a goddamned hot air balloon pilot, and then the obvious happens. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:54, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
@SarekOfVulcan: LOL, I'm honored that you put this in your calendar (I assume; surely your memory isn't that good?). So did you really do this? Because that's the only way to decisively find out how psychic I am how well my time travel device worked. I said you shouldn't go to Memphis, not that something bad would happen to the whole place. </dials knobs and pushes buttons and flips switches on time travel device (no touch screen, made in late 80's)/>. Yep, I see you didn't buy the tickets. Smart move. Floquenbeam (talk) 15:16, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
I should probably say something nice about the article, but I'm so taken with the photos that I can't focus on anything else. That all looks beautiful. Floquenbeam (talk) 14:41, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Perhaps I don't know enough what unintuitive means. It was played in Rome in honour of a pope from Buenos Aires - but the composer (who played the piano) couldn't know that might happen when he wrote it. He won't play piano for us, but for a concert I'll hear in the Rheingau. We'll have Helena Rüegg on bandoneon (by sad circumstances for the one originally scheduled) who they all say is great, - will translate her article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:17, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.
Technical news
Progress has started on the Page Triage improvement project. This is to address the concerns raised by the community in their 2022 WMF letter that requested improvements be made to the tool.
That's .... a lot of pent-up energy going into "discussing" that oppose. Imagine the accumulated endorphin release. The Community are happy they can finally jump on a hapless oppose with gusto, I'm sure Ingenuity can handle one good faith (ridiculous, but good faith) oppose, and Jack4576 can probably handle a whirlwind of disagreement (in fact, that's probably what he was after). And I get slightly entertained. All in all, a win-meh-win-win. People can always be trusted to ignore Beeblebrox's sound advice. Floquenbeam (talk) 20:46, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
I'm sorry, being sensible was an accident! You caught me at a bad time! I'll try harder in the future! Would a sensible person use all these exclamation marks!? --Floquenbeam (talk) 12:48, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Oops
The irony is that if you had remembered not to make the second oops, you wouldn't have made either of them! :) Izno (talk) 17:38, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
It's more common than I thought, apparently. Dance your way to Heaven! Still haven't found time to do a proper Youtube search. *Insanely* busy in real life right now. every time I look at WP I feel guilty because I should be doing something else. Floquenbeam (talk) 23:00, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
The only yt of the Te Deum (from Italy, in the article, no search needed) is charming but our singing was much better - of course ;) - perhaps we'll have bit on yt eventually - everybody agreed to filming. Cute things happened such as a church song in one of the most unique churches I know having a melody by the same composer (the one with the rose). All pictured up to today if you click on songs. Do "something else". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:39, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the note and the pix. This is part of my allotted 5 minutes on WP today. I hope you feel honored! :) Now I'm off to do something else... --Floquenbeam (talk) 12:49, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Tomorrow, you can admire in four minutes that - after the busiest weekend of the year (if not the decade) - I managed to clean-up biographies of four people in a row who recently died, including two mezzos. - Yes I feel honored. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:23, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.
Technical news
Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.
Arbitration
The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.
Hey Floq, I just saw your edit summary at MastCell's talk page, and I'm taking it in the context of you making a similar correction at my talk today. Please don't let the discussion with me leave you feeling bad. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:22, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
It just seems like when you start misspelling your own name - frequently!! - that it's a sign that it's the beginning of the end. Floquenbeam (talk) 22:24, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Please, please, please, please, somebody add evidence about the Malleus interactions, so I don't have to spend hours digging for diffs myself. Please. Floquenbeam (talk) 22:33, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
I don't know if it's because it would have been time-consuming or not, but I would personally have cringed at the idea of having to look through some of Eric Corbett's diffs myself, so yes. Kudos to Ritchie. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper-(talk)13:51, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
To be fair to MF/EC, that's not what I meant, and I don't think it's entirely reasonable to pile all that on him. SW came off looking worse in that interaction, IMHO. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:04, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
Your comment on ITN
Hey Floq, I just wanted to say thank you very much for backing up my comment on ITN and pointing out that I was not, in fact, making a bad faith accusation as GCG claimed. As you mentioned, I was lamenting on how certain !voters are able to (unintentionally or not) state an incorrect fact in their !votes, and it suddenly gains steam when others say "per that rationale". With no real means for fact-checking and with an already subjective consensus-finding process, an admin on ITN is generally left with no choice but to accept that rationale if it comprises the majority of !votes. This is along the lines of what I was getting at, but I suppose my statement was so short and ambiguous that it could have been construed as accusing one another of lying.
Sometimes it feels like I'm in Crazyland where up is down and black is white, when it comes to ITN, which is partially prompting my mental health break -- along with some changes in my life that remind me that Wikipedia is not therapy. I'm glad to have your voice of reason present in that discussion. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper-(talk)13:49, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
ITN is just Wikipedia, condensed and in miniature. And in turn, WP is just the world, condensed and in miniature. I don't want to be mean to MG, because I think in this case it was just a misunderstanding of the situation, but in general, the idea that everyone has their own "alternate facts" that we somehow can't criticize seems to have taken hold of the world in general, and ITN in particular. I'm not sure why I keep it on my watchlist; I seldom comment, and I seldom do admin stuff. But most discussions are too mean-spirited for my taste (certainly worse than WP as a whole).
I just saw your explanation on Tryptofish's page, and you giving him the benefit of the doubt. After all, it's not like he's a new user. He's been here 15 years.
So have I.
Not once did I have anyone even attempt to give me the benefit of the doubt.
I was worried I'd burned bridges but it turns out there were none to begin with.
I don't know what benefit of the doubt you wanted that you weren't given. Everyone was unanimously of the opinion that TF was in the wrong. I removed the instances of his posts that bothered you as soon as I saw them. I didn't remove any of your posts, some of which were sub-par, and neither did anyone else. Right? Did someone besides TF do something to you? I guess I won't write more until I know whether the "this will be my final remarks on the subject" statement is accurate. No sense talking to someone who isn't going to reply. Floquenbeam (talk) 14:46, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
If that benefit of the doubt had been given to me, the remarks wouldn't have remained up for a day. They would have been removed until substantiated. Statements like... "Any chance if you two agree to stop talking to each other for a while we can let this drop for a week?" "It really is just in Golbez's court at this point to choose to lower the temperature." "So far as I can tell, Tryptofish believes the accusation and is even saying they could substantiate it, but doing so would ... well, lead to a heated discussion over actions long ago." "You could try being the administrator in the discussion and stop needlessly getting into fights and increasing the temperature of fraught discussions." "If you want a community resolution that badly, WP:BOOMERANG is an option considering Tryptofish has indicated they're trying to walk away, while you are clearly not." "When you pester someone to the point of frustration and then run to ANI to try to get them sanctioned" "Instead, it's time for both of you to move on, and we're already halfway there." (when the offending remarks were still present) "Golbez, “you people”? You appear to be making some sort of threat." and my favorite, "I think it's commendable that you're not digging up links from a decade ago" (because it would 'raise the temperature', not stopping to consider the fact that there were no links to dig up. This is a big part of what I'm talking about. They assumed he was telling the truth and just couldn't be arsed to dig up links. There was never a lick of truth to a thing he said.)
Askarion and Schazjmd are the only ones I'm seeing who sided with me on reasonable terms, who didn't just ask me to take time off and try to ignore the accusation, who didn't immediately decide that my behavior as an admin was worse than what he did.
No one checked with me on a personal level.
No one even asked me what really happened ten years ago. They either believed Trypto, or shrugged when he didn't bother backing it up, figuring that I deserved what happened because I was rude.
They simply let an accusation of racism (and later, lies about me accusing people of transphobia) remain up for a day then told me to get over it while it was still up.
I thank you for stepping in and doing what needed to be done. I'm certainly not complaining that you took too long - as you said, you removed them as soon as you saw them, and I thank you very much for that. I was absolutely not going to touch his remarks, I was going to be completely aboveboard on this and not use or abuse admin powers, or get in an edit war. But on a personal level, seeing this, and seeing the multiple people slap Trypto on the back for his behavior on the page, and not a single person reaching out to me... it hurts. And I don't expect you or anyone to do be able to do anything about that. And when I saw your comments on his page... I just ... I wanted to say something. I feel a need to get it out into words. That's all. And since you were the one I said I respect too much to get into a slapfight with, ... I'm rambling now and veering into whining.
I knew I hadn't engaged much with the community in the last 19 years but I never felt like it was hostile towards me. This is largely my fault - not networking, not making friends, just doing my editing thing. But it still really hurts. --Golbez (talk) 15:28, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
(watching:) I have no idea what's going on, but I reached out to you four years ago OTD, not in friendship or social engagement but in appreciation of what you mean to the project. I tried again today, - thank you for at least a nicer edit summary when reverting than the one before. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:44, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
I know you did the right thing. And I know I said it was the last line. I ... I think I just wanted to share how hurt I was with the person who helped. Sorry to rip the scab off again. I'll go. --Golbez (talk) 02:48, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
No worries, I just misunderstood the first post here and thought you thought I should have done something different. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:08, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
No. I just wish everything else had been different. If it had stayed up for a day and no one responded at all until you removed it, that would be entirely different. But I was told for a day that this was my fault, that it was good that he didn't source such a lie, that if I just wait 24 hours maybe I won't be so peeved about it... that everyone seemed to accept his word as truth and the only words that I said that anyone cared about were "fuck off". That is what broke me here. --Golbez (talk) 16:40, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
On my talk are links to two musical videos, one is a full concert I enjoyed, opening of the RMF at Eberbach Abbey, and the other a short introduction to a "forgotten composer", which actually has me (small, short) in the background during the closing statement by the new festival's initiator (recorded just before the concert) while I was talking to the recipients of the new prize. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:06, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi Gerda. First video was Nicht gefunden, but I could open second one. Wouldn't have recognized you if you hadn't said you were in it, low resolution video. Glad you enjoyed the concert; if RMF is just opening, I imagine there will be more to come. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:02, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, done, yesterday: the Mass in B minor, heard in concert then, at the festival (choir, three soloists and conductor had articles by me, conductor stepped in from Leipzig). Today: a woman caught by the iron curtain (improved with SusunW and GRuban). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:55, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Why ask for objections if you're going to close something so quickly regardless of the feedback you get. Which in this case amounted to one (non-admin) objection and 1 (admin) for whom it was not their first choice but can live with it and regardless of the uninvolved admin feedback upthread, which had read to me when I looked at it 5 hours ago as heading towards removing TPA. Like if the feedback you get isn't going to matter just close the thread in your preferred way, which isn't my preferred way but feels with in admin discretion. I wouldn't have said anything if not for the rapid close after your proposal and I'm certainly not going to undo it (because again your decision feels within discretion and so I'm going to respect it the same way I'd have hoped for a decision for TPA to be revoked would have been respected) but suggest that you only ask for agreement if you're willing to actually wait for that agreement to happen. Barkeep49 (talk) 15:03, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
I am increasingly finding every aspect of this place is too dysfunctional to make a positive change, especially with the limited time I have to edit here. I waited a little while, got some positive feedback, and thought maybe I could - in my own tiny way - cut through the clutter and reduce the dysfunction. Life is too short, someone else can close it in a way more satisfactory to you. Floquenbeam (talk) 15:17, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
I've always admired your input as one of the few still around who sees through the nonsense and regularly cuts the Gordian knots that endless discussion often leave us with. Remembering, of course, that the energy of "cutting the Gordian knot" is not "oh I know how to resolve this knot" but "bollocks to your stupid knot. why did you make this?". Folly Mox (talk) 17:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Floquenbeam, I have seen you around goodness knows how many times over the years, and I have always respected you as an administrator. (Which doesn't mean I have never disagreed with you, nor does it contradict that fact that you have at least a couple of times indicated that you have had no respect for decisions I have made which you didn't agree with.) On this occasion, though, I think you were mistaken. Your closure did not come by any means reflect anything which could be regarded as consensus in the discussion, and no matter how strongly you feel that your view was right, you should not have imposed that view while it was clear that it was not in line with so large a proportion of the comments which had been posted. JBW (talk) 16:46, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes, I realize vote counting is more important than trying to de-escalate a conflict, and that IAR isn't really a thing anymore. To be clear, I'm not mocking your comment - I'm acknowledging that you have accurately summarized the current consensus of the AN/ANI regulars. AN/ANI is not a conflict-resolution process, it is a conflict-escalation process, where the primary concern is to give everyone a chance to weigh in on a conflict. Someone is going to get kicked in the nuts, and AN/ANI are needed in order to gain community consensus on who it's going to be. Any attempt to nip something in the bud is at odds with this purpose. The fact that Jack appears to have agreed to walk away, and that two people who were supporting sanctions said "no objection", is not a defense; it is actual proof that I ruined a perfectly good conflict-escalation process.
I have already said I will not try to improve AN/ANI anymore, and I already undid my close. Is there anything else? Is it OK to leave closing AN/ANI threads to admins who agree with the purpose of AN/ANI, or do you need me to state for the record that I agree that AN/ANI are functioning as they should in order to avoid my inevitable arbcom ADMINCOND desysop for another few months?
Any input from talk page stalkers on where on WP the desire to de-escalate conflicts is still welcomed would be appreciated. Perhaps I should publicize WP:FLOQ ... Floquenbeam (talk) 17:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
I whole-heartedly support your effort to make AN/ANI a conflict resolution process again. I was about to post a comment listing a bunch of other stuff Jack had done, but then I read your comment and thought better of it. Escalating at this point is only borrowing trouble from the future (a future which is still in Jack's power to change). All this is to say I appreciate your wisdom, and would like to see more of it at AN/ANI. – bradv18:36, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm sorry what you've decided to take away from my comment is that I don't think you should close AN/ANI threads. I think that's a real loss to the community. What I had hoped for was that you would either wait for more than 17 minutes after asking for feedback or you would just use your considerable skills as a closer to action things that you felt right without going through some soliciting feedback step. There's nothing wrong with taking the time to form consensus and there's also nothign wrong closers using the discretion that the community trusts them with to close threads. Conflating those two things is part of what strikes me as broken about ANI and your skill in avoiding those pitfalls is why I recently very publicly was excited about you closing a different disfunctional thread and why I have not attempted to argue that the close itself was unfair. Barkeep49 (talk) 23:48, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
I've got a different perspective: it isn't that I'm walking away from AN/ANI because I think you think I should; you don't have that level of power. I'm walking away because this constant "you didn't dot your i with the right font size" snarking makes closing AN/ANI threads (or ERRORS, or ITN/C, or pretty much any deletion discussion) miserable. If it wasn't you, it would be someone else with some other complaint (see elsewhere in this thread). It is irrational to say that it would be fine if I had done this unilaterally, but if I waited for feedback from two people then I was obligated to wait for more. But I'm too tired of dealing with this "rules yes rationality no" to have a productive discussion. Floquenbeam (talk) 15:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
I agree to a very considerable degree with your view of the administrators' noticeboards, and for precisely that reason I stay away from those boards unless something happens which leads me to one of them on a particular occasion. I don't, however, agree with how you have applied that view on this occasion. I also wonder, if you believe that the way you expressed yourself above was not "mocking" what I said, what you would regard as mocking. JBW (talk) 21:17, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Clarification: yes, I am mocking the content of the comment. No, I am not mocking you, because you are accurately telling me what AN/ANI have become. You're just the messenger. Floquenbeam (talk) 15:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Sigh. Do I or don't I?
First, just want to say, I appreciated the AN close. Second, if per the above you don't wish to express an opinion here, that's of course fine. This is just a curbside (wow, not in Wiktionary). I'll also throw in pings to Rosguill since they restored the close, to UtherSRG per comments on my talk, and to Drmies since he made the tragic mistake of nominating me for RfA with a co-nom who makes very few blocks, and thus getting all my tough block questions forevermore. (It's never stopping, Doc. Not till they've desysopped both of us. Maybe not even then.)
Anyways, Special:Diff/1167582128. I hate these situations. It's de jure a TBANvio, from someone who's on his last last last warning, but at the same time it's relatively minor and, for a number of reasons, it's never ideal for the proximate cause of an indef to be something relatively minor, even when the person's been told that even a minor violation will be the end of the line. I'm on the fence just about 50/50. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 19:10, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
As long as you promise to take this with a grain of salt (I have not interacted with this editor before the attempted AN closing) I have a really hard time imagining that to be even a de jure topic ban violation. I don't even see it as testing the limits. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I stand by my assessment that it breaks the letter of the restriction—it is a comment on the contents of an AfD discussion—but your take is enough for me to hold back for now. Thanks. P.S. if you want to add a belated ping to a comment without making a new reply, you can edit it into the comment (which doesn't send a ping) and then also include it in the edit summary (which does). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 20:04, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
In my view, it reads like an acknowledgement of a post, and not a meaningful comment on anything specific. isaacl (talk) 22:45, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I hate these situations as well. I've had only a few interactions directly with Jack. I get their position to a degree - that Wikipedia has a role to play that it is not playing well - and that some pushing needs to be done to get the project onto a better track. And I've found some of his comments to be hilarious and hilariously pointed to that end. However, he has gone too far too often. He needs to learn how to appropriately push and has been given more than ample opportunities and has failed too frequently. - UtherSRG(talk)13:00, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Removing {{unlocked userpage}} would have the same effect as the semi-protection, no? Not sure what the purpose is of adding semi-protection when the page deliberately has been left as unlocked by @Tamzin. lizthegrey (talk) 23:14, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I’m not sure; I’m on my phone and it takes forever to look at anything. I may have been wrong, but if so Tamzin will revert me I’m sure. I’ll look closer to better under what you’re talking about when I’m on an actual computer. Floquenbeam (talk) 23:24, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I always keep my userpage unprotected unless protection is acutely necessary, because I'd rather vandals target it than something actually important. But no worries, I'll unprotect in a bit. Your fast reaction is appreciated as ever. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 23:34, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
(sheepishly)@Lizthegrey: I was completely unaware that user pages were automatically semi-protected unless you put {{unlocked userpage}} on them. Certainly hasn't always been like that. The more recent that change was, the less stupid I feel, but I do feel kind of stupid. Thanks for bringing it up. If Tamzin had just undone it, I would never have known. Floquenbeam (talk) 18:12, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
My story today pictures a friend whose birthday is today ;) - we listened to music she helped publishing - at a fancy place (which looked different when Bach played there). - Saw Rhein in Flammen but am behind with images. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:57, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Not sure I get it. Anyway, she threw a lovely feast, with plenty of music last Saturday. - Do you believe that arbitration is a working system? Next time I get called to a case I won't go - waste of time. Remember 10 years ago? The rising temperatures because I had suggested to place an infobox on a composer's talk page? Now we have an RfC on the same talk, and to my observation, three people commented in a day (and I won't). Tells me that the topic cooled down considerably ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes, it has some faults but I believe arbitration is a working system. Especially since I haven't heard any better idea any feasible better idea. --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:05, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
I saw just that one case, and what I saw was that one arb misunderstood one diff, and made that diff a reason to ban, with the vote that made it the majority, and - which made it worse in my eyes - none of the colleagues told him he misunderstood, none cared enough to look at the so-called evidence. I don't believe we need that system. Period. - I believe we had a good workshop phase in that case, but: how to get ideas from the workshop to the decision?? The writing arb made my day when he added my suggestion for Beethoven (from the workshop) to his article as the community consensus. I thought the infobox wars were over then (2015 that is) if they ever existed ;) - watching the RfC with interest without passion. I made my comment just above it: the principal editor doesn't like it. We didn't need arbcom to arrive there. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:37, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Cute: one of the opposers voted by me ;) - Finally: June pictures updated, with three great RMF concerts, and you'll recognize Goldatzel! Fireworks to come next batch. - My story today is very personal: the DYK appeared on Wikipedia's 15th birthday, and describes a concert I sang. I was requested to translate the bio into German for a memorial concert ... - see background, and we talked about life and death. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:36, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
Goldatzel photos always bring back a pleasant memory. I hope you ate more than that! :) Glad you've been able to enjoy so many concerts. Floquenbeam (talk) 18:01, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
I didn't need much more, because the pasta (hidden below the rucola) with layers of cheeses was filling. It was a cold dish - great on a hot day. The party shared desert, before the music ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:06, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
(replying to most recent edit summary) of course you're tired, if you went everywhere you show as "7 July"; that's like 9 different places! Hope it's a fun kind of tired. -Floquenbeam (talk) 22:21, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
It was just the normal tiredness after midnight, not enough energy to word a sentence ;) - While today's DYK highlights Santiago on his day, I did my modest share with my story today, describing what I just experienced, pictured. I began the article of the woman in green. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:45, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Listening to Siegfried from the 2023 Bayreuth Festival, third act, Andreas Schager as Siegfried waking up Brünnhilde, reminded me of this discussion. Was there anything in it demanding arbitration? - A few weeks later, three participants were admonished, - for what still remains a mystery to me? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:15, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
I enjoy getting updates about walks, music, flowers, food, vacation, etc. I'll give my annual reminder that I just don't think discussing infoboxes does any good (too many bad feelings, too much dysfunction, too many mistakes on both sides), and am unlikely to reply to infobox comments. I do hope you enjoyed the performance (I'm confident you did). --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:24, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Today I remember Jahrhundertring (article written in defiance in 2013), and I'm listening to Götterdämmerung from the Bayreuth Festival (pictured), - funeral march on right now, - the image (of a woman who can't believe what she has to see) features also on the article talk. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:21, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Guideline and policy news
Technical news
Arbitration
Miscellaneous
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Site ban for Athaenara. Thank you. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 19:02, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
.jpg?lang=en)
.jpg?lang=en)
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversighter changes
Floquenbeam (talk) 20:05, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Done, although grudgingly, as explained in the edit summary. It doesn't change much, so I'm glad it holds up well in reruns. I assume the thing you find the most humorous is the fact that I actually keep thinking the Mariners are going to get out of their slump "this" year? Floquenbeam (talk) 17:30, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Bureaucrat changes
