Novem Linguae

Admin elections

As far as I can tell, you're the driving force behind the current admin elections trial -- both proposing it and shepherding it along. I wanted to stop by and say thank you for your work. It's too soon to say how it's going with respect to whether the elections give the admin bit to the "right" candidates, whoever one might think those are, but it's clear that it's suppressing some stressful and pointless negativity. I would never have believed that a version of RfA could be created that was such an improvement over the atmosphere of the traditional version. I have not participated in the many discussions about how to improve RfA as I thought it was an unsolvable problem. I'm glad to see that I was wrong.

We'll have to wait and see how the elections turn out before judging whether this is the right way forward for RfA, but this has already led to most of the 35 candidates having a much more reasonable evaluation of their qualifications for adminship than they would have had under the existing system, and will surely give us more admins than we would have had otherwise. Thank you for your creativity and diligence on this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:12, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind message. I am mainly the implementer. The creativity part and the original plan were designed by @Worm That Turned. To be honest I am undecided on administrator elections and don't feel passionate that it is the right or wrong way. But I am passionate that the community wanted to try it, and I am passionate that this idea didn't get a fair shake in WP:RFA2021 due to a questionable RFC close, so I stepped in to help get the trial going. Hopefully it ends up being a net positive experience for Wikipedia. And if not, that's fine too. We'll find out in the debrief! –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I would also like to add my thanks. I've been following the developments (without participating in the discussions leading up to the election) and I think that the election system is far superior to RfA, which I think is a vicious process. Tweaks like capping the new system at 10 candidates per election might be an option going forward, but given the amount of work that you and others have put into it, I felt it was my Wiki-duty to read all the candidate statements and comments before voting last night. I'm really impressed by all the candidates who have come forward out of a sense of wanting to volunteer for a project they believe in. Thank you and the others for all the hard work! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 17:10, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	I'm really grateful for all the time you spent on my script issue, and glad we got to a decent solution. Much appreciated, Novem Linguae! – Anne drew 01:14, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

My pleasure. Thanks for the bling! –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:17, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your work over at Wikipedia:Administrator Elections, where it looks like you've responded to 117% of the discussions and put in a lot of procedural and technical work to make this thing go well. Much appreciated!

JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 10:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

My pleasure. Happy electing! –Novem Linguae (talk) 18:42, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Now that voting is over, I wish to thank you, Novem Linguae, for helping to steer the community through the admin election process, and comprehensively reviewing all candidates. Your time and efforts are greatly appreciated. starship.paint (talk / cont) 01:55, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

unblock-review

One addition which you may as well stick in:

wikitext = wikitext.replace( initialText + appealReason, '\n{{unblock reviewed|' + action + '=' + reason + '|1=' + appealReason

Note the \n; it prevents a rendering bug that can be seen here. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 02:14, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Looks like the same bug as https://github.com/NovemLinguae/UserScripts/issues/229

I think I'm going to start using GitHub to track these bugs. You can keep an eye on the list of bugs at https://github.com/NovemLinguae/UserScripts/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3AUnblockReview

Will see if I can work on this a bit tonight. –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:21, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm going to keep running a fork of your current version until https://github.com/NovemLinguae/UserScripts/issues/229#issuecomment-2451167659 or similar is implemented. It's just aesthetic, but annoying. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 01:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

@Jpgordon. I did some work on this tonight. I think I fixed all your bugs. Go ahead and reinstall my version and see if it works better. If it works smooth, let me know in a couple days and I'll start spreading the word that folks should replace the old one with this. User talk:Novem Linguae/Scripts/UnblockReview.js may be a good page to centralize discussion going forward :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:44, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

ok! thx! --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 15:36, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Just gave github a new bug! --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 15:58, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

And rolled back to my own version after multiple failures. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 16:56, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Bummer. Will take a look. Filing bugs in GitHub is great so definitely keep doing that if you're willing. I've got unit tests set up now so every time I squash a bug and add a test, the bug should be gone for good, until we've got so many tests that the script is running really smoothly. Stay tuned! –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:23, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

@Jpgordon. OK, I did a couple more bug fixes. Feel free to switch back to it and beta test it some more :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:33, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

k! --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 00:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Jpgordon. Hey, honest opinion, is the UnblockReview version I've been working on better or worse than the Enterprisey unblock review? How much better or worse? Depending on the feedback I may start trying to get folks to replace the Enterprisey version with mine. Also, any bugs still popping up frequently or did we squash most of them? Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Nothing's jumped in my face since my last report; I've been using your version exclusively, and there don't seem to be regression errors. Might just be random, but I haven't seen any of the misplaced results recently, which I appreciate. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 18:48, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey, is [1] a repeat bug? It fails silently. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 03:57, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

@Jpgordon. Fixed. The problem was the user just put an {{Unblock}} tag with no |reason=. Feel free to file GitHub tickets if you find any more bugs. –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

A fox for you!

Thanks for all your work with the admin elections, I really don’t think it would have happened without you! Have a nice rest of your Sunday :)

Zippybonzo | talk | contribs (they/them) 12:26, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar, much deserved

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		You've already received a couple of plaudits for this work, but you deserve this one as well. For diplomatically, tirelessly, gently moving the process forward. These admin elections would not have happened without you. Kudos. Now on to the debrief and (with luck) many more to come! —Ganesha811 (talk) 19:47, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

AELECT discussion

Hey! I assume you're planning on sending out a mass message with the results of EFA2024. I want to coordinate with you on that, because I want to put in a link to the RFA2024 phase II discussion – which I hope ends with a reauthorization of EFA well into the future :) I think I'm about ready to let the page go live to RfC, so let me know, thanks. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 21:02, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Theleekycauldron. Thanks for the message. Actually I already made a debrief page at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Debrief before seeing your user talk message. I was planning to do an unorganized debrief for a few weeks -> a couple surveys and RFCs to tweak things about AELECT for a few weeks -> RFC to renew. I was planning to do it independent of RFA2024, since that process is 9 months old now. I honestly hadn't even considered that phase 2 might still be going on as I assumed it was long done.

I'd like to request that you hold off launching Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Administrator elections. That would mess up the plan I had and I think we need to think about this more. Thoughts? –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:28, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Giving this some more thought, maybe we should do the debrief and little RFCs outside of phase 2, and then the official renewal RFC could be done in phase 2? That might be a good compromise. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:39, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Good idea to split the parts! I think it'd be nice to keep all the formal voting in one place – would it work for you if we did the debrief and prepared the proposals to be voted on outside of phase II, and then voted on the proposals and renewal inside? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 21:49, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hmm, maybe. I wonder if we can survey some of the easy changes though rather than RFC them. Might not need phase 2 for those. Let's think about it and we can circle back when the debrief wraps up. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:24, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Inviting your comments for publication

Novem, I'd like to invite you to think about commenting on the AELECT process for the next issue of The Signpost i.e. issue 16, probably later in November. If you don't mind, I'll hold a place for your comments in the next News and notes. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Bri. Sure, I can definitely help with that. If you remember, would you mind coming back here and dropping a link when you're ready for me to take a look? –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Special Barnstar

	The Admin Elections barnstar
	Thank you so much for all your hard work in organising the administrator elections. It would not have been possible without your efforts. – DreamRimmer (talk) 16:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

E-mail

Hey Novem Linguae -- I note you sent me an e-mail. Unfortunately I can't actually read e-mails at the moment (computer issues) so is it possible for you to communicate in some other format? If privacy is a concern you could place it somewhere in userspace and I'll copy it offline and then delete. (I'm online now, but in the process of going to bed.) Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 12:36, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey Espresso Addict. Ah I see. It's OK then, you can disregard the email. Thank you for the follow up, and happy editing :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:49, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Adminship trial

Hello, I just saw that community added new administrators in it's ranks through trials. I have a question regarding this, does this trial adminship come with a time duration or is it indefinite like the adminships through rfA are? Ratnahastin (talk) 03:51, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Ratnahastin. Nope, no trial. It is permanent. The trial part refers to the fact that the community only authorized administrator elections to happen once, and requires a second RFC to do it again. Hope that makes sense. –Novem Linguae (talk) 05:01, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Yet another thank you

I think you've gotten more than enough bling (), but I also wanted to take the time to thank you for your months of tireless work to make the administrator elections happen. My closure of the RfC that got the ball rolling 6 months was one of the only closures I've ever done, and it took me many hours to get right, and I'd say it was a positive experience. It was an equally positive experience to watch you work as you tirelessly coordinated on the AELECT talk page and Phabricator tickets. Shepherding the process that got so many administrators to be assigned at once, something not done since 2010, is no small achievement! It was my pleasure to take part in the RfC closure and the subsequent initial MMS message drafts. I look forward to see what you do moving forward. Cheers! —Sirdog (talk) 01:50, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Sirdog. I appreciate your thoughtful message. It was very nice to see the process be successful after all that work. Thank you for your role in this as well :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:36, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello, online admin

Do you want to just semi-protect this talk page? I'm not entirely sure of the correct etiquette here, and I know the harassment isn't as severe as it would normally be to necessitate page protection, but the user is gone for now. Any good faith newbie will need to go somewhere else to get their questions answered anyways. It would be more efficient than the current revert-warn-block cycle, anyway. Your call though- I just spotted you were active right now, you know the backstory, and I figured you're easily the most drama-free admin I could ask. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 10:35, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

@GreenLipstickLesbian. Good idea. I think there's enough recent vandalism to justify it. Protected. Thanks for letting me know :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

No, thank you for doing it so quickly! <3 GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 11:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Technical Barnstar
	Thanks for your recent work on Twinkle getting rid of the backlog and technical debt. NightWolf1223 <Howl at me•My hunts> 04:15, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm glad someone noticed :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

About botclasses.php

I see you are interested in botclasses.php. Thank you. I recently added Pavel Malahov's functions, have you had a chance to look at them? Orfur (talk) 21:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Orfur. I saw the edits on my watchlist and made some formatting improvements, but haven't looked at the functions in depth. @Wbm1058 is the maintainer of that particular page. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Orfur left a note on my talk as well. I just replied; see User talk:RMCD bot/botclasses.php

Followup on the discussion at User talk:wbm1058#That bug with moving pages. Can you open SpecialMovePage.php in your VS Code and let me know whether Intelephense works for you with that file? If it does, then I'll know its an issue with my local setup and not some more global problem caused by MediaWiki code complexities. On the suggestion of a friend over our Thanksgiving meal, I asked ChatGPT for help. It gave me quite a thorough list of things to try. I worked through most of them, but, so far without success. Thanks, wbm1058 (talk) 14:44, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Wbm1058. Yeap it's working. Screenshot. You can see the words "intelephense" in several spots (next to each "problem" in the left pane, in the tooltip on the top right), indicating it's working. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:17, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi again. I got tired of banging my head on solving this with my Windows machines, and decided to celebrate "Christmas in January" by buying an ASUS NUC#Fourteenth generation with Bluetooth keyboard, mouse and Bose speaker, and installing Ubuntu on it. My new machine is, initially, focused on MediaWiki development. This time I followed the mw:Local development quickstart instructions, and that went fairly smoothly. Now after opening SpecialMovePage.php in VS Code, I think I know why Intelephense wasn't working for me. This time I used the newly-free GitHub Copilot, which said "/fix Undefined type 'MediaWiki\SpecialPage\UnlistedSpecialPage' To fix the problem, you need to import the `UnlistedSpecialPage` class from the `MediaWiki\SpecialPage` namespace. The edit generation was not successful. Please try again." Then I noticed my "Explorer" sidebar panel. "You have not yet opened a folder. [Open Folder] Opening a folder will close all currently open editors. To keep them open, add a folder instead. You can clone a repository locally. [Clone Repository] To learn more about how to use Git and source control in VS Code read our docs. So my problem seems to be with trying to make changes by editing files in isolation, rather than from folders. I thought I already cloned the repository. – wbm1058 (talk) 02:34, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeap, that sounds right. I always use File -> Open Folder to open projects. VS Code uses that to figure out what files are within a project, not the git repo. Bummer I didn't think of this earlier but I'm glad you have it figured out now. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:47, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm making progress. Intelephense is working and indicating there are "9+" problems in SpecialMovePage.php but I'm not seeing the nine PROBLEMS listed as shown in your screen shot. My current VS Code setup has Explorer, Search, Source Control, Run and Debug, and Extensions options installed in the left sidebar. How do I add Problems to the sidebar options? wbm1058 (talk) 15:22, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Hmm, my Problems Panel is running across the bottom of my screen, rather than on the left side. That must be the default location for it? wbm1058 (talk) 15:49, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

You can drag the tab from the bottom to the left to move it. It defaults to the bottom because that's wider and the warnings are often long. But I prefer it on the left. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

S201050066

Hi Novem Linguae I want to give an update regrading the banned user S201050066 one week ago he made a YouTube video where he called out the Wikipedia community for blocking for ip address 2607:FEA8:59E1:9D00:0:0:0:0/64 this shows that S201050066 should not anywhere Wikipedia Andykatib has been telling him in the past to move on from Wikipedia but he hasn't listened do you think we should make a long term abuse page for S201050066 I hope you enjoy your day 173.239.131.234 (talk) 14:28, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I've blocked the IP for one month for block evasion. Looks like the user is trolling. I'm not familiar with this master, so hopefully my analysis is correct.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:21, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

User interactions page?

Hey Novem, Thought you might know this, but do you know the URL for a Wikipedia tool that shows how much user X has interacted with user Y? I've used it before, can't remember where it is. If you reply here, please ping me. Thanks, TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 02:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

@TheTechie: https://sigma.toolforge.org/editorinteract.py – DreamRimmer (talk) 02:37, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

@DreamRimmer That was it, thanks. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 02:39, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

"Capture and replay testing" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Capture and replay testing has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 30 § Capture and replay testing until a consensus is reached. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thank you for this. Polygnotus (talk) 01:02, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

My pleasure. Graham is a champ for going through RRFA and keeping a good attitude about it. It's the least we could do! –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Certainly braver than I am. Polygnotus (talk) 20:10, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings!

File:Statues of Three Wise Men in the Philippines 06.jpg

Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia in 2024! Wishing you a Very Merry Christmas and here's to a happy and productive 2025! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:15, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Toolforge

Hello, Novem. Merry Christmas! I'm having a bit of trouble with Toolforge and don't know how to resolve it. I hope you can help. When I create a tool in https://toolsadmin.wikimedia.org/tools/create, at the step where I need to enter a tool name, I try using some unused names like "apple" (https://apple.toolforge.org/) and "banana" (https://banana.toolforge.org/), but Toolforge still doesn't allow me to create a tool with those names. I'm not sure where to start, so I’d like to ask for your advice. Thank you very much! Plantaest (talk) 19:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Plantaest. I ask my Toolforge questions on Discord or IRC. That seems to be where Toolforge admins hang out. wikitech:Help:Toolforge might also have some info. Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:54, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Seasonal greetings:)

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2025!

Hello Novem Linguae, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2025. Happy editing, — Benison (Beni · talk) 18:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC) Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

— Benison (Beni · talk) 18:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Happy Christmas

Merry Christmas, Novem Linguae! Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 23:21, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Hello Novem Linguae: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 02:15, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Merry Christmas

Hello Novem Linguae: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, —Ganesha811 (talk) 12:59, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	Thanks for your help to the project! TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 02:57, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Greetings of the season

~ ~ ~ Greetings of the season ~ ~ ~

Hello Novem Linguae: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Spread the love; use {{subst:User:Dustfreeworld/NY1}} to send this message.

--Dustfreeworld (talk) 10:40, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks and Happy New Year

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Happy New Year! I was reflecting recently on some of the folks that were welcoming when I first started here and am just taking a moment to say thanks. The way I did one of my very first GA reviews caused confusion, and you were quite positive and encouraging about how to make that situation more clear going forward. Hope you're doing well in 2025, Rjjiii (talk) 21:59, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

A note about your NAC

I would like to notify you, in relation to your recent non-admin closure at Talk:Trump International Hotel Las Vegas Tesla Cybertruck explosion § Current title is way too long, that you are, in fact, an administrator. I apologize for being the bearer of bad news here. JJP_Master (she/they) 18:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I came here after seeing the header that Novem had passed RFA...so this made me chuckle, thanks. Vanamonde93 (talk) 19:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Haha. Sounds like a DiscussionCloser bug. I've filed a bug report at User talk:DaxServer/DiscussionCloser#Non-admin closure template erroneously placed for admin in new DiscussionCloser. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:49, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

@JJPMaster I'll assign the admin rights now :P — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 21:19, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

@DaxServer: I think you might have gone too far. JJP_Master (she/they) 22:53, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

@JJPMaster As the Elders say: With great Power comes great Responsibility! But then again, there is God-Killer 🙉 — DaxServer (t·m·e·c) 09:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Hello there, 'tis the season again, believe it or not, the years pass so quickly now! A big thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia in 2024! Wishing you a Very happy and productive 2025!  ♦ Maliner (talk) 02:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

Question about suspected automated editing?

I've come across an account with over 11k edits in a one month window, including some across multiple articles within the same one-minute window in a way that at the very least looks like some kind of bot crawling for issues to fix. I don't actually know if there's a procedure for suspected automated editing, but it seems a little extreme to jump to something like an ANI for an eager editor? The policies weren't actually very clear or helpful here, so I figured I'd ping someone from the recently active admins list. Thanks! Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 16:31, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm not a bot. I'll even solve a captcha to prove it. I just happen to make a lot of edits very quickly. KMaster888 (talk) 16:34, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

You made this comment and these three edits 1 2 3 edits within a sixty second window. I'm unsure how you can read and accurately edit minor typesetting issues and respond to a comment on a third party talk page within that window. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 16:41, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I guess I'm just better than you. Get off my back. KMaster888 (talk) 16:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

@Warrenmck. Hey there. Are any of the edits problematic? Do you have some WP:DIFFs of bad edits? We do have a WP:BOTPOL, which has rules about filing WP:BRFAs for fully automated editing. But no use getting too into the weeds with BOTPOL if none of the edits are bad. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

They're here, so it's not exactly my intent to adjusdicate the quality of their edits on a third-party page, but yes, the most recent article created was generally quite low quality. They've made 18 edits, almost all to completely distinct articles, since the reply above only a couple of minutes ago. I think this may be an LLM (and the editing pattern of dipping into creating new articles about companies in the midst of tons of general editing is somewhat suspect, to me), so possibly issues with automatically generated text. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 16:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

If I was an LLM, would I tell you to go **** yourself? No. So shut up and stop accusing me of shit that is made up in your head. KMaster888 (talk) 16:45, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Please be WP:CIVIL. –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I've never heard of someone creating an LLM bot to edit Wikipedia. I think this would be an unusual strategy and that the LLM bot would be blocked well before 10,000 edits. Please provide WP:DIFFs of problematic edits if you'd like to pursue this further. –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Oh there are certainly LLMs on Wikipedia at this point (you can find case studies of them being used, not just dead-internet-theory-ing). They're on every other social network. I would almost certainly link to the edit above your reply, though I'd call that problematic for other reasons. I can't tell if "Editing too quickly to be human" is a problem, if not, then hey, no issue, but I'm pretty convinced from the context and replies here being made within a razor thin window of three other edits at completely different articles that this isn't human editing; there's no way someone is doing this manually given the volume of text and array of pages involved within single-digit-second timeframes.

See:

• 16:54, 7 January 2025 diff hist 0 Nick Kyrgios
• 16:54, 7 January 2025 diff hist 0 Brexit
• 16:54, 7 January 2025 diff hist 0 Machu Picchu
• 16:54, 7 January 2025 diff hist 0 Red Army
• 16:54, 7 January 2025 diff hist 0 Golden Horde
• 16:54, 7 January 2025 diff hist −2 PNG

But I came here to ask, and have my answer. Thanks. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 16:54, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Climb down out of my ass, take a deep breath, and walk away. If you can't handle someone 10Xing you in your face then you should not be on Wikipedia. KMaster888 (talk) 16:59, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Please be WP:CIVIL. –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Clearly you don't know how to do an insource search. KMaster888 (talk) 17:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Keep in mind that there are ways for editors to edit rapidly legitimately. For example, using WP:AWB you could probably do 5-10 edits a minute and still check each one (which would follow the semi-automated editing part of BOTPOL). Or by opening lots of tabs and preparing the edits, then going through the tabs and rapidly clicking submit in each tab.

It sounds like in this case, the edits themselves are fine, so WP:ANI is probably not a good idea. If you're convinced there's a BOTPOL violation going on here, I'd make a post at WP:BOTN. Although please consider being more detailed when you post. A vague "this editor edits fast" may not get much interest. Specific is good. –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Honestly, I was unclear on the general policies here in the first place. Sounds like it may not actually be an issue (other than the abusive replies here), so no need. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 17:02, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

They’re now systematically editing, in an identical reverse order I did, every article I’ve edited at lightning speed. Very odd. Ah well, can’t complain about wikihounding if it’s actively improving the articles, though in some cases it looks a bit like unnecessary edits for the sake of editing all the articles in an input list, which still looks like bot behaviour to me. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 18:44, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Climb off my back. KMaster888 (talk) 18:45, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I apologize if I hurt your feelings by accusing you of editing as a bot, it wasn’t my intent to upset any actual human users. That doesn’t make either manually or automatically going through my entire edit history not kind of odd. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 18:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Stop pinging this admin for your BS KMaster888 (talk) 19:00, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

ANI about the above

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 20:57, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hi Novem Linguae. Thank you for your work on Human safari (terror campaign). Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia by writing this article! Hopefully you have a blessed day today!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 15:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar

I just noticed that you’ve created numerous scripts and gadgets that are incredibly useful for Wikimedia users. I've already installed most of them, and I must say, thank you so much for that! However, there’s something I’d like to apologize for. A while back, I copied and pasted one of your scripts from your user page onto my own without asking for your permission. I realize now that I should have sought your approval first, and for that, I sincerely apologize. Baqi:) (talk) 10:04, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Hey there @Jannatulbaqi. Thanks for the barnstar. No need to apologize. Everything on Wikipedia is released under an open source license, so you are free to copy, modify, fork, etc. Just make sure when you first do the copy paste, you give proper attribution (WP:CWW) using an edit summary such as copied content from User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter.js, please see that page's history for attribution. Happy patrolling :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 10:14, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

WP:ANI - User:CoastRedwood

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 13:29, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Bad sources

Hiya! Not sure if you are the right person to ask but since you are an admin and a nerd...

I have a list of good sources, but it could also be useful to have a list of bad sources. Specifically I'd be interested in the type of sources UPEs use.

So my idea was to create a list of succesful AfDs (that resulted in the article being deleted) that contain strings like "undisclosed paid " and "UPE " and "promotional ", and then scrape the refs from the deleted articles and sort them by how often they are used.

REFUNDing all those articles to then scrape the refs would be very inefficient of course, but an admin could run a script that extracts the references. What do you think? This can be useful for CiteHighlighter and people working with drafts and NPP. For example for AfC one could create a list of submitted but unreviewed drafts containing only bad sources.

I am also thinking about scraping refs from declined drafts. Polygnotus (talk) 16:13, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Hey there. Thanks for the idea. If you can think of some websites that UPEs commonly use that aren't already highlighted red in User:Novem Linguae/Scripts/CiteHighlighter, I'd certainly be happy to consider adding them to CiteHighlighter. I would just need a list. I don't think I can commit to doing a mass refund or writing a script though. Might take too much time. But maybe you can get the data you need by patrolling Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as spam and viewing some pages before they're deleted? CiteHighlighter will also highlight URLs with certain spammy keywords orange. If you find some keywords that I don't have in there yet, let me know and I can look into adding them :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 16:39, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

The three queries I mentioned above plus "advert" return a combined 62k results (of course duplicates and unsuccesful AfDs would have to be filtered out). The downside of using EventStreams to detect when an article gets added to Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as spam is that it would take a long time to build up a big enough dataset to draw conclusions.

I can parse the AfDs to determine which were succesful and generate the list of article titles. The admin would only run a script that dumps the content of those deleted articles in a textfile; shouldn't be too complicated. I can then filter out the refs, determine which domainnames they contain if any, and then sort those domainnames by frequency. So the admin would only need to read the code that reads a list of article titles and dumps the article content to a textfile to ensure it does nothing nefarious, and then run it and send me the output. Polygnotus (talk) 17:31, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Are you thinking of writing a script then asking me to run it? Although maybe not all 62k results... maybe like 500 or 1000 or something. What programming language and platform were you thinking for this?

If you can find a similar data source that isn't deleted pages, someone who isn't an admin can do a database dump and do something similar with AWB's database viewer. –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:47, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

I am kinda using you as a sanity check to see if my idea makes sense. I could ask you or another admin; the only requirement is that they are able to read the code to confirm it does nothing nefarious (read from one textfile, write to another). Of course we don't need every single one of those deleted articles, I only mentioned that number in comparison to patrolling Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as spam. 1000 queries would take roughly 1.5 hours (with a 5 sec delay after each). I am not sure after which point you'd run into diminishing returns. I most often use Java, for reasons beyond my understanding, but I could probably also write something like that in Python or JS. I am on Linux and Windows (again, not by choice). Often these articles are terrible so they get deleted quickly so only a very small amount would end up in a dump (because dumps do not contain articles that were deleted at the time the dump was generated). So as far as I know there is no data source that can give me the same data without major disadvantages. Polygnotus (talk) 18:15, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

The technical solution you propose sounds like it'd do the job. Your edit count and activity also look really good, so don't forget you could probably go write a WP:GA and then run for WP:RFA and just become an admin yourself :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 02:37, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

Mistake

Did you remove my !vote? [2] SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:11, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

@SmokeyJoe. Oops. So sorry about that. I've restored it. Something like this happened to me yesterday too. Not sure why I am having so many weird edit conflicts :( Please feel free to double check my restoring and make sure everything looks good. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:22, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:35, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

hello

Hello, Novem Linguae. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

@Novem Linguae Thank you so much for your time, and have a great week! Phoebezz22 (talk) 18:23, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Twinkle deployment

Hey Novem. Would it be convenient for you to deploy the current version of Twinkle from Github? I don't know if that entails some process of double checking changes first. The most recent ones seem to have been on December 10. SilverLocust 💬 23:30, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Sure.  Done. No double checking needed. The double checking gets done before approving each PR. Deploying just consists of following the deployment checklist. Maybe someday Wikimedia will get GitHub continuous deployment. We almost had an intadmin bot get approved for that once, but it fell through. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:51, 24 January 2025 (UTC)