User talk:Donald Albury/Archive 12

This page is an archive of past discussions. 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.

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).

Guideline and policy news

• There are a number of new or changed speedy deletion criteria, each previously part of WP:CSD#G6:

1. G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
2. R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
3. G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.

• The Wikimedia Foundation now requires all interface administrators to enable two-factor authentication.
• Members of the Bot Approvals Group (BAG) are now subject to an activity requirement. After two years without any bot-related activity (e.g. operating a bot, posting on a bot-related talk page), BAG members will be retired from BAG following a one-week notice.

Technical news

• Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length. All accounts must have a password:

1. At least 8 characters in length
2. Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
3. Different from their username

User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on MediaWiki.org.

• Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
• {{Copyvio-revdel}} now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.

Arbitration

• Following the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: AGK, Courcelles, GorillaWarfare, Joe Roe, Mkdw, SilkTork.

Miscellaneous

• Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
• Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.

---

Hello Donald: Why are you removing my information under notable person (current resident or past resident)? Thank you, Nikki Oldaker Noldaker (talk) 23:55, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi! In regards to this edit the template is intended to include both public and private schools. They are listed separately. See Template:Orange County, Florida Schools

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 00:57, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Sorry. - Donald Albury 01:07, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

No problem! Anyway, happy editing :) WhisperToMe (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Remember when you asked to be notified about the next Wikipedia meetup in Gainesville, Florida? Good news! I'm organizing a meetup to celebrate Wikipedia Day at the University of Florida Marston Science Library from 4pm to 7pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2019. You can find more about the event on its event page -- I hope you'll be able to join us!

If you wish to opt-out of future notifications, please remove yourself from the list of interested users. Alternatively, to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. Thank you so much for your attention! -- Gaurav (talk) 17:26, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Punta Rassa, Florida, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page San Carlos Bay (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Florida#Blue Fields Massacre. I think that was the best project to ask. Note its creator. Doug Weller talk 10:35, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

It seems a little odd this one-month old account is making contributions in a manner similar to that of an experienced user. They have been putting out templates such as {{uw-v4}} and using terms like "rvv" that, from my experience, wouldn't typically be used by new users. "Flap" in the username also reminds me of a LTA case, particularly this one. It'd be slightly premature to start an SPI lacking adequate evidence whilst the user has done nothing significant to warrant a check. However, I think there should be some behind-the-scenes effort to determine if this really is a good faith user or a chronic block evader who's masking as a newcomer similar to 1. What do you think? -- Flooded w/them 100s 19:21, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Although the name seems familiar, I don't see where I would have run across the user. I am not experienced in sock investigations, so I'm not sure how I can help. - Donald Albury 19:36, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Hmm... That's too bad. -- Flooded w/them 100s 06:53, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Donald You reverted my deleting "principal" from the description of Boynton Beach, but I can't find any explanation why. I gave a reason why I deleted it. Principal is different from important or significant; it means what's on the top of the heap. High school principal runs the high school Principal in a business is the top dog, the owner. Looks to me like the two main or principal cities in southeast Florida are Miami and West Palm Beach. Why isn't calling Boynton Beach (about 32nd city in population in Florida) principal a little misleading? Thanks, Alan R Moabalan (talk) 19:54, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

@Moabalan: Principal cities in Metropolitan Statistical Areas are designated by the Census Bureau. Boynton Beach is the third largest city, and therefore a principal city, in the West Palm Beach-Boca Raton-Boynton Beach metropolitan division of the Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, Florida MSA. - Donald Albury 20:56, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer. I don't agree with it, but I'm satisfied by the fact that you've stated a reason that works for you. Why don't I agree with it? Well, to me principal means "main" (actually the word principal comes from the same root as "first" or "prime." Primero in Spanish is the word for first. And the third-largest anything is not the main one. The Superbowl this weekend will be between the main teams from two halves of the NFL and who was third I've already started to forget because they weren't principal enough. Second, it's only third-largest in the West Palm Beach segment of the metro area. Maybe you could change the article to say in West Palm Beach division instead of Miami in general, where B Beach comes in something like 17th. But we're into shades of meaning here. You respond to Wikipedia changes in a matter of minutes; I respond to them a month or year later or not at all. Have it your way. Now I looked it up. Here's the Census on the subject from its own webpage. "Principal Cities of a CBSA include the largest incorporated place with a population of at least 10,000 in the CBSA (nope) or if no incorporated place of at least 10,000 population is present in the CBSA, the largest incorporated place or census designated place (CDP) in the CBSA. (nope) Principal cities also include any additional incorporated place or CDP with a population of at least 250,000 or in which 100,000 or more persons work; (nope) any additional incorporated place or CDP with a population of at least 50,000 and in which the number of jobs meets or exceeds the number of employed residents; (Maybe--this sounds like it wants to exclude bedroom communities from being "prinicipal" cities--do Boynton Beach folk tend to drive out of the city limits to work? Do you live there?) and any additional incorporated place or CDP with a population of at least 10,000 but less than 50,000 and at least one-third the population size of the largest place and in which the number of jobs meets or exceeds the number of employed residents." (nope) Personally, I consider the census data included in so many Wikip. articles as the least useful part of the page. So I don't like the Wikipedia rules of the game in the first place and you do. Alan in Tucson Moabalan (talk) 21:38, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

We go by what the sources say. I used to live (many years ago) in Delray Beach, which is sandwiched between Boca Raton and Boynton Beach. Boynton has plenty of industries and businesses (At one time it was home to a Motorola pager plant that employed almost 4,000 people.) - Donald Albury 21:55, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2019).

Administrator changes

Enterprisey • JJMC89

BorgQueen

Harro5 • Jenks24 • Graft • R. Baley

Interface administrator changes

Enterprisey

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is currently open to reevaluate the activity requirements for administrators.
• Administrators who are blocked have the technical ability to block the administrator who blocked their own account. A recent request for comment has amended the blocking policy to clarify that this ability should only be used in exceptional circumstances, such as account compromises, where there is a clear and immediate need.
• A request for comment closed with a consensus in favor of deprecating The Sun as a permissible reference, and creating an edit filter to warn users who attempt to cite it.

Technical news

• A discussion regarding an overhaul of the format and appearance of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is in progress (permalink). The proposed changes will make it easier to create requests for those who are not using Twinkle. The workflow for administrators at this venue will largely be unchanged. Additionally, there are plans to archive requests similar to how it is done at WP:PERM, where historical records are kept so that prior requests can more easily be searched for.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2019 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2019, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2019, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• A new IRC bot is available that allows you to subscribe to notifications when specific filters are tripped. This requires that your IRC handle be identified.

---

Hey hey, I just wanted to drop you a note about this edit. I'm a little confused as to why you consider this name promotional; I googled "Atlantis Ralbadisole" and did not find any organizations under that name. I would also like to remind you that user warnings go on the user's talk page, rather than their user page. The general consensus to avoid editing another user's user page is reflected at Wikipedia:User pages § Editing of other editors' user and user talk pages. Cheers, cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 20:55, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

The user's only edit so far has been this. - Donald Albury 21:24, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Donald Albury, that's fair! Just make sure next time it goes on the right page. They won't get a new message notification if you place it on their user page, and it's considered bad form to put talk messages on user pages. Cheers, cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 13:33, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

The placement on the user page was a mistake. I was switching back and forth between tabs while I was checking out the user, and ended up on the wrong page. - Donald Albury 14:16, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

The short description says: "An ocean basin and marginal sea of the Atlantic Ocean, largely surrounded by the North American continent". Errrr... quite long at 17 words; still 12 words excluding noise words like a, an, the, by, of, etc. Tied for longest short description I've seen. Some short descriptions are obviously superfluous, like "lake" for Lake Superior. My criteria for revision is shorter than 5 words or longer than 10 words. We don't need to define gulf here as a marginal sea or ocean basin, because a 'gulf' which is neither is not a gulf. It's sufficient for this usage to simply say, "gulf of the Atlantic Ocean". We don't need to define the landforms of the gulf, because the gulf of California is also surrounded by the North American continent. It's sufficient to say it's a "gulf of the Atlantic Ocean in North America". But Hudson Bay and Gulf of St. Lawrence are also gulfs of the Atlantic Ocean in North America, so the description is ambiguous. So how about "gulf of the Atlantic Ocean in southeastern North America"? 9 words, getting close to a reasonable limit. The real question is, is this sufficient to notify the reader that this is the article he seeks, or it is not? There's an art to short descriptions - they're not part of text, more like directory entries. Clarity is more important than absolute accuracy. What else could be "gulf of the Atlantic Ocean in southeastern North America"? No, it's not exactly "in" North America, within the boundaries of the continent, any more than Gulf of California is "in" Mexico - it is not. But no one is going to call us on it. Sbalfour (talk) 01:11, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

@Sbalfour: How about, "Atlantic Ocean basin extending into southern North America"? Just eight words, although more characters than your version. - Donald Albury 01:54, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Hmmmm... unambiguous, pretty clear. I'll take it. I see you already patched it. Regards, Sbalfour (talk) 02:02, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

@Sbalfour: I had started to edit the description, decided to bring my version back here, and inadvertantly committed my edit. Oh well. - Donald Albury 02:10, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• The RfC on administrator activity requirements failed to reach consensus for any proposal.
• Following discussions at the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and Wikipedia talk:Administrators, an earlier change to the restoration of adminship policy was reverted. If requested, bureaucrats will not restore administrator permissions removed due to inactivity if there have been five years without a logged administrator action; this "five year rule" does not apply to permissions removed voluntarily.

Technical news

• A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
  • paid-en-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
  • checkuser-en-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2019 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Base, Einsbor, Jon Kolbert, Schniggendiller, and Wim b.

---

The Harn Museum of Art in Gainesville, Florida is organizing an Art+Feminism editathon this Saturday, March 16 from 11am to 4:30pm. You can find out more on their Outreach Dashboard or on the Harn's website.

If you wish to opt-out of future notifications, please remove yourself from the list of interested users. Alternatively, to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page. -- Gaurav (talk) 00:13, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Mr. Albury,

you are right, I should have given the source of my edits. So I just did it a few minutes ago.

I) About Florida (Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach)

The source (Tropicalité Géographie physique intertropicale by Jean Demangeot, éditions Armand Colin, Paris, 1999? ISBN 2-200-25027-4, page 44, Figure 19 Génétique des climats intertropicaux, source Marcel Leroux 1989) comes from a book of a French expert of tropicality, Mr. Jean Demangeot who himself used many climate works from Marcel Leroux a French climatologist.

In fact, according to Leroux, all Florida is mainly under the aerological mechanism that he labelled AM 2 for "Alizé Maritime de type 2" (Maritime trade wind of type 2). There are 3 types of maritime trade winds : the type 1 which is the eastern branch of the trade wind directed towards the equator, the type 2 is the central branch of the trade wind and is roughly parallel to the equator, and is more or less directed from east to west (rather northeast to southwest in the northern hemisphere and southeast to northwest in the southern hemisphere) and finally the type 3, the western branch which goes up in latitude on the eastern face of a continent, for instance along the Brazilian Nordeste (there is also AMC for "Alizé Maritime Continentalisé" : continentalised maritime trade wind).

AM 2 is a humid trade wind which explains why Florida has a humid climate. Besides many (but not all) AM 2 regions are also subject to cyclones and Florida also suffers from cyclones. So AM 2 + cyclones are the main factors explaining Florida humidity.

At least another source states that Florida, many spots in the Caribbean area and in the North of South America, in the easten coast of Brazil (Salvador, Rio, ...), eastern coasts of [Madagascar, Southern Africa, Australia, Philippines] and many Pacific islands such as Fiji, Hawaii, ... have tropical trade-wind climates :

Climatologie by Pierre Estienne and Alain Godard (éditions ... Armand Colin).

I've written some stuff in the Tropical rainforest climate talk page to explain that all tropical rainforest climates AREN'T equatorial climates.

The latter are specific tropical rainforest climates because a) the aerological mechanism is different and b) there is no cyclone.

In equatorial climates, the main aerological mechanism is the alternation MAM2 that is "Meteorological Equator / AM 2" or "Monsoon / AM 2", but Monsoon here is defined as the Meteorological Equator (and not as the seasonal alternation occuring in the Indian Ocean or as the deviation of the trade winds when they pass the equator) that is the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ).

So in Tropical rainforest climates either you have the MAM2 mechanism or the AM2 mechanism.

In the MAM2 regions, the Meteorological Equator (or ITCZ) is more frequent, dominant than the trade winds

while in AM2 regions, the maritime trade winds are dominant and in that case the climates are tropical trade-wind rainforest climates (with or without cyclones : "with" in Florida for instance, "without" in Eastern Brazil).

In MAM2 climates there is little wind (except when there are some storms or cyclones), the doldrums or the calms known by sailors

while in the AM2 climates you have a lot of wind often annoying.

In the Tropical rainforest MAM2 climates when you have no cyclones then the climates are equatorial (there are no cyclones in equatorial Africa for instance).

II) About Liberia

Just refer to the article where you have the "Liberia map of Köppen climate classification." which clearly indicates that only the south (in fact southeast) is equatorial (with no dry season at all). You also may have a look at the Monrovia article to note that Monrovia (which isn't in the south but in the center-west of Liberia) has what the article calls a "Monsoon climate" (in fact a subequatorial climate) because January is "dry" according to the Köppen climate classification (51 mm < 60 mm) and so is not strictly equatorial.

Carlo Colussi (talk) 07:25, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@Carlo Colussi: With regard to Liberia, I reverted you because your edit had created an ungrammatical and confusing sentence, as well as not being sourced. - Donald Albury 13:13, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

Technical news

• In Special:Preferences under "Appearance" → "Advanced options", there is now an option to show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link.
• The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Please see meta:Community health initiative/User reporting system consultation 2019 to provide your input on this idea.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee clarified that the General 1RR prohibition for Palestine-Israel articles may only be enforced on pages with the {{ARBPIA 1RR editnotice}} edit notice.

Miscellaneous

• Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
• As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.

---

First of all if you click the link next to median household income it shows the correct Florida median household income. I don't understand how you can say what I posted was incorrect when it is correct? Sjj1091 (talk) 00:11, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

@Sjj1091: My apologies. I am too used to numbers being changed without updating sources, and I neglected to verify what the source said. I have restored your edit. - Donald Albury 01:36, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits. However, some of the musicians you removed from the list probably are notable enough for an article - it's just that the articles haven't been created yet. For instance, I know that one or two have articles at German WP, so there is at least a case for notability. Over time I'll try to check them, so don't be surprised if one or two creep back onto that list. Regards, Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:02, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

@Ghmyrtle: I did search for info on each artist, but didn't see much from reliable sources, but if you can find reliable sources and write articles based on them, that would be great. - Donald Albury 15:38, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Hmm, I note you reverted the lot of my extensive and well-cited edits to the New River (Broward County, Florida) page on the sole basis that they were good faith edits that may have unintentionally removed "all mention of the C-15 canal." The C-15 canal, however, is in Boca Raton, nowhere near the New River. I assume you may have been referring to the G-15, but note that I gave the G-15 its own entire (and well-researched!) section as the North New River Canal -- the name it was known by decades before the South Florida Water Management District even came into existence and labeled canals with letters and numbers. And I referred to it as the G-15 parenthetically, which should be sufficient given that it was only mentioned once in the previous version of the article.

In the end, I don't understand why all of the edits were just swept away on that erroneous basis you cite. I'm going to undo the reversion because what I added was more than simply "good faith edits" (i.e., presumably well-intentioned but patently misguided edits that add nothing to an article). They are informative, thoroughly researched, and important given the canal's contribution to the history of South Florida. Certainly, I do not want to get into an edit war, so if you have suggestions for improving the edits, by all means, let's discuss on our respective talk pages or the article's talk page. But I do not see what warrants such scholarly time and effort on my part being swept away with a click. Cheers (and certainly in good faith!) -- Jhw57 (talk) 19:08, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

@Jhw57: I looked at the three edits you had made since the last time the article came up on my watchlist, which created this difference. The second paragraph of the History section after your last edit on April 26 read as follows:

Prior to the 20th century, the New River originated as two streams, the North Fork and South Fork, which merged and connected directly to the Atlantic Ocean via the now defunct New River Inlet. The river was heavily modified in the first half of the 20th century. The North Fork was extended as the C-12 Canal along present-day Sunrise Boulevard, while the South Fork was extended by two canals. The first was the G-15 or North New River Canal, which was created in 1912 to help drain the Everglades. It also served as a significant transportation route for shipping produce from the area just south of Lake Okeechobee.^[1] The second canal extending the South Fork was the C-11 or South New River Canal, which connects to the Miami Canal.^[2] The South New River Canal also connects to the Dania Cutoff Canal, which leads eastward from the C-11 canal to the Intracoastal Waterway. ^[3]

Your edits earlier today left the second paragraph in the History section reading:

Prior to the 20th century, the New River originated as two streams, the North Fork and South Fork, which merged and connected directly to the Atlantic Ocean via the now defunct New River Inlet. The river was heavily modified in the first half of the 20th century. The North Fork was extended as the C-12 Canal along present-day Sunrise Boulevard, while the South Fork was extended by two canals, one of which was the C-11 or South New River Canal, which connects to the Miami Canal.^[1]. The second canal extending the South Fork was the C-11 or South New River Canal, which connects to the Miami Canal.

This is what I was reacting to. The G-15 (I misremembered the letter when I wrote the edit summary, not being able to see the text on the page) or North New River Canal disappeared from the History section, and the mention of the C-11 or South New River Canal was duplicated.

I assumed your edits were in good faith, but I also assumed that an unintentional error had resulted in some information being deleted and other information duplicated. - Donald Albury 20:16, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

@Donald Albury: Yes, I inadvertently duplicated the line of information on the C-11 canal when I created the new section on the G-15 (North New River) canal. (I think that still needs to be fixed.) It happened when I was trying to create a segue into the newly created section that made sense/had flow. In any event, nothing was deleted, only added to/expanded. It could be that the North New River Canal/G-15 deserves its own page, given the history behind it. The Miami Canal has one, albeit a stub, that is separate from the Miami River. Jhw57 (talk) 12:08, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:34, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:03, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment concluded that creating pages in the portal namespace should be restricted to autoconfirmed users.
• Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Technical news

• XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

Arbitration

• In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
• Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Miscellaneous

• A request for comment is currently open to amend the community sanctions procedure to exclude non XfD or CSD deletions.
• A proposal to remove pre-2009 indefinite IP blocks is currently open for discussion.

---

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:24, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Miami Oolite, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oolitic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

i surely hope if my english was more skillful if i do not know how to say a certain word or word in english, then is it allowed to help yourself in using google translate? i know that some websites are against rules, is that so? (i'm really right now so if there is no permission then please avoid punishment.Atlantic Channel (talk) 21:30, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

I didn't notice your message before. I changed that content because it's clearly inaccurate. According to other articles that are about vertebrate and echinoderm, the total number of species of these two phylums are well beyond 70000. And I just checked the pdf version of the reference book, found no related content about the number of species. 七战功成 02:15, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Put in a number, as long as it is supported by a reliable source. - Donald Albury 01:31, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Albury,

I recently edited the Wikipedia page for Lantana, Florida, to include a hyperlink to the Lantana Public Library's website in the section entitled "Culture." I noticed that someone restored the page to its previous setting and it appears to include your name. To include a link to the Palm Beach County Library System's site AND NOT THE TOWN OF LANTANA'S OWN LIBRARY is unfair and misleading to users and visitors wanting to find our Library. We predate the County's Lantana Road Branch by many years and frankly, by using a similar name to ours, the County Library System created confusion to patrons and newcomers alike. Stop contributing to the CONFUSION AND MISLEADING PEOPLE and INCLUDE A LINK IN THE TEXT TO THE TOWN OF LANTANA LIBRARY'S WEBSITE, PLEASE.

The argument that there is a link to the Lantana Public Library's website under "External Links" and that this is sufficient does not stand. The County Library System's Lantana Road Branch is NOT part of Lantana, Florida. And yet, the Lantana, Florida, Wikipedia page chooses to include a hyperlink link to it in the Culture section, and NOT TO OUR website. Yet, we are the Town of Lantana's library.

I will take this up with the Town of Lantana, Florida, if you are unwilling to correct and rectify this.

Sincerely,

Cathy BurnsMcb07d (talk) 21:34, 30 May 2019 (UTC) Webmistress Lantana Public Library 205 W. Ocean Ave Lantana, FL 33462 www.lantanalibrary.org

@Mcb07d: PLease note that I removed a bare URL from the article. Bare URLs are used in Wikipedia articles only in the External links section at the end of an article. Any link used to support content in an article needs to be used in a citation (WP:ELRC). (See Wikipedia:Citing sources.) That same paragraph already includes a citation linking to the Lantana library web site (the [23] following "The Lantana Public Library is an independent public library serving the town"), although I notice that it links to your web site's "History/Digital Library/Archive" page. I will change that to point directly to your web site's home page. I am aware of the confusion caused by the profusion of library systems in Palm Beach County (I worked for a few months at the Boca Raton Public Library, and had to explain to county residents that a Boca Raton address did not entitle them to a card in the city library). Also, while you are welcome to edit Wikipedia, please read over our policy at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, to avoid any misunderstandings about your edits. You always can request changes to the article on Talk:Lantana, Florida. - Donald Albury 22:50, 30 May 2019 (UTC) - Edited to correct new citation number. - Donald Albury 22:58, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

I restored my edit to the Taino article which you reverted. You revert puzzles me because the original wording of the sentence I edited was grammatically incorrect. My edit not only corrected this problem but made it easier to understand. Please have a look at this diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ta%C3%ADno&diff=prev&oldid=899691183 Lechonero (talk) 18:03, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

@Lechonero: Frankly, I don't find your version particularly easier to read and understand than the previous version. It also strongly implies that women made the important decisions in Taino villages. I do not have access to the full article cited after that section, but the abstract does not seem to support such an interpretation (it does mention relatively unspecialized gender roles). - Donald Albury 18:38, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

@Lechonero: I withdraw my comments above. For some reason, you edit looks much better to me than it did before. I don't why I was reading it wrong. Now, it looks fine. I did find the source cited at the end of that sentence, and it really does not support the statement very well, being about archaeology supporting the stability of Taino social structure for a while after the Spanish arrival, and mentioning only in passing that there were some cazicas. My apologies for my misunderstanding. - Donald Albury 21:55, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. Lechonero (talk) 22:01, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello! I want to say, it was never my intention to present that link as a source bur rather, just to compensate for there not being an article about that ship on English Wikipedia, as I've seen it's been done whenever there's not an existing English article on a certain subject, but another Wiki does have an article for said subject (example).

If adding an interlanguage link violates WP's policy, then I'll do it no more. --179.6.199.252 (talk) 01:19, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

I restored and fixed the link. Please note the recommended way to make such links, at Help:Interlanguage links#Inline links (I had to look it up, myself). - Donald Albury 01:55, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you!--179.6.199.252 (talk) 03:38, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Sent by DannyS712 (talk) using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 03:44, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

First batch: [1]

Regards! --T*U (talk) 11:55, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).

Administrator changes

Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický

CheckUser changes

Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
• An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
• An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

Technical news

• The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
• Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.

Miscellaneous

• The previously discussed unblocking of IP addresses indefinitely-blocked before 2009 was approved and has taken place.
• The 2019 talk pages consultation produced a report for Phase 1 and has entered Phase 2.

---

Would you mind examining this century-old photograph? ---------User:DanTD (talk) 02:41, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

@DanTD: Your edit did not mention how that spur was relevant. When the only mention of rail transportation in the article is that Amtrak serves the city, a brief mention of a spur that was used for passenger service many decades ago seems like excessive detail. Plus, you did not cite any reliable sources. The more obscure a detail is, the more it needs an in-line citation. I've worked on a number of articles about railroads in Florida. Details about trackage supported by reliable sources are appropriate in those articles, but unnecessary in articles about cities and towns, unless such trackage is a notable feature of the city (for example, that trains used to run down the middle of a busy street). - Donald Albury 11:12, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Hey, I reported an editor to ANI and one of the administrators suggested that I invite editors active on that page to assist with coming to a consensus. Since I personally know you I was hoping that you could help. I understand if you don't want to get involved though. PopularOutcast^talk2me! 21:45, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

@PopularOutcast: I'll try to help, but I was off line all day and don't know how much time I'll have for WP tomorrow. - Donald Albury 02:09, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Donald Albury, if you have time. Another editor took the matter to AN/3 and the user in question was warned. Still, it would be nice for another party to look at the edits and decide what should stay or go. There have now been a lot of edits but not a lot has changed. My objections have been about verifiability. If you do take a look, I would start on the talk page because I think that gives a good idea of what was contentious. Thanks so much. PopularOutcast^talk2me! 02:14, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

The issue I think has been resolved but you are welcome to look if you like. PopularOutcast^talk2me! 22:52, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

@PopularOutcast: I saw that in AN/I. I'm still short of time for WP, and trying to catch up on my watchlist.It will be tomorrrow afternoon before I have much time. - Donald Albury 00:53, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

Administrator changes

28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam¹ • Flyguy649 • Fram² • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe

¹Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

²Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment seeking to alleviate pressures on the request an account (ACC) process proposes either raising the account creation limit for extended confirmed editors or granting the account creator permission on request to new ACC tool users.

• In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

• The scope of CSD criterion G8 has been tightened such that the only redirects that it now applies to are those which target non-existent pages.
• The scope of CSD criterion G14 has been expanded slightly to include orphan "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects that target pages that are not disambiguation pages or pages that perform a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).
• A request for comment seeks to determine whether Wikipedia:Office actions should be a policy page or an information page.

Technical news

• The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.

Miscellaneous

• In February 2019, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) changed its office actions policy to include temporary and project-specific bans. The WMF exercised this new ability for the first time on the English Wikipedia on 10 June 2019 to temporarily ban and desysop Fram. This action has resulted in significant community discussion, a request for arbitration (permalink), and, either directly or indirectly, the resignations of numerous administrators and functionaries. The WMF Board of Trustees is aware of the situation, and discussions continue on a statement and a way forward. The Arbitration Committee has sent an open letter to the WMF Board.

---

sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:29, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

The page says 18th century. It's 19th...? Peterpeter1978 (talk) 07:41, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

@Peterpeter1978: A quick quote: "The first documented use of the term Seminole was in 1771 during the British era. The term, an anglicized corruption of the Spanish cimarron, was first applied to Muscogulges who migrated to Alachua, and later to those who settled in Apalachee."^[1] Another author states that between 1740 and 1812 at least six Seminole villages were established in Florida, and that there were large Seminole camps in what are now Alachua, Leon and Levy counties by the 1760s.^[2] - Donald Albury 16:32, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Sent by ZLEA via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:59, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the page Wikipedia:Office actions has been changed from a policy page to an information page.
• A request for comment (permalink) is in progress regarding the administrator inactivity policy.

Arbitration

• Editors may now use the template {{Ds/aware}} to indicate that they are aware that discretionary sanctions are in force for a topic area, so it is unnecessary to alert them.

Miscellaneous

• Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
• The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.

  Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

---