HouseBlaster

Welcome to my talk page!

Note: I prefer to keep discussions unfragmented. If you leave me a message here, I will respond to it here as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. Unless you request otherwise, I will ping you so that you know I have responded. By the same token, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there.

Thank you!

Purging of categories

Hi, I unfortunately have another clarifying question regarding the purging of categories, specifically the level of effort (or due diligence) a purging editor is expected to make to ensure that a page does not belong in the category that is to be purged. Generally, the characteristic that a category is about must be mentioned explicitly in the article, and it's not enough if it's maybe mentioned in some cited source but not stated in the article (random example: let's say, a person's article is in Category:People from Johannesburg, the person is indeed from Johannesburg, and this origin is stated somewhere in one of the cited sources, but the article doesn't mention the location at all), right? If I'm correct in assuming that, I see three possible options/levels of effort:

1. One acts solely based on what's already in the article (without checking the cited sources; so in my previous random example, one would simply remove the article from Category:People from Johannesburg).
2. One acts based on what's already in the article as well as anything in the already cited sources (so in my previous random example, I imagine, it would be considered good practice to not remove the article from Category:People from Johannesburg but to add the information to the article, citing the already cited source).
3. One acts on what's in the article and any of the already cited sources as well as any information one can find in other (reliable, secondary) sources (so assuming for my random example that the information was not already in one of the cited sources, one would check whether a source exists that supports the Johannesburg claim, and if one finds such a source, I imagine, it would be considered good practice to not remove the article from Category:People from Johannesburg but instead add both the information and the new source to the article).

Which one of these is correct or standard practice (or the approach you usually take)?

I'm asking because I recently took on Category:Body horror video games (deletion discussion) and quickly looked at every page in that category (and its subcats), and not a single one mentions the term "body horror" (NB: one says ... the choices made by the player affect the narrative and visual design..., generally along the lines of eldritch or body horror, but the term is not used in the cited sources). This, paired with the fact that afaics, every page in this cat was added to it by the same user (Latiromazzaire, who also created the cat) on the same day (1 June 2024), made me think that the deletion rationale (entirely original research) was accurate, and of course, choosing option 1 above would be equivalent to emptying this category (I have not looked at every cited source in every article but the refs' titles were obv included when searching for the term).
Note: In the deletion discussion, Zxcvbnm gave two examples of sources where games are described using the term. The games covered in those sources are a) Winnie's Hole (article is currently only the parent cat Category:Body horror but does use the term "body horror" supported by other sources [note: this is also the only video game article I found when searching for the term in Wikipedia articles in general]), and b) Zoochosis (video game) (article is currently in the cat but doesn't cite this specific source or use the term). So, the cat could potentially have at least two entries.

I'm usually inclined to choose option 3, but given the history of the user who added the categories, I'm not sure how fruitful this option would be in this case (I'm also not at all familiar with horror-ish video games, so I'm not great at judging for which of the games in the cat a search could be worth it if there are any for which this is the case). Sorry for the long message. Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 14:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Felida97! Again, thank you for helping at CFDWM – it is truly appreciated :) I normally find it best to do a mixture of options 1 and 3. My logic is well-developed articles (roughly B/GA/FA) will not neglect to mention WP:DEFINING characteristics. If the article is less well developed, I generally find it easier to jump straight to google rather than examining each source individually. Again, if it is not showing up consistently, it does not meet WP:DEFINING and should be removed. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 16:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much, that logic makes a lot of sense and is very helpful! Felida⁹⁷ (talk) 22:23, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Question from InfoNerds (07:38, 30 November 2024)

How do I put up a Wikipedia article with a photo, dob, and biography? If you look at my recent sandbox “talk” I am trying to get it published. It’s for a very known underground musician “Chance Morris “ from Kansas City Missouri please help --InfoNerds (talk) 07:38, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello InfoNerds, and welcome to Wikipedia! The first thing I need to ask is if you have a conflict of interest with Morris. Some examples of conflicts of interest include knowing Morris personally or being paid to write this article. The next thing we need to do is ensure Morris qualifies for an article. Do you have two or three reliable sources which are independent of Morris (that means not paid for or solicited by Morris or anyone associated with him) and cover him in detail? Thanks, HouseBlaster (he/they) 19:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Question from Amogelang22 on Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Suggestions/Archive 15 (11:49, 30 November 2024)

Hi How do people recognise their talents --Amogelang22 (talk) 11:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

What does this have to do with editing Wikipedia? HouseBlaster (he/they) 19:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Category:LGBTQ by continent and country

Hello, HouseBlaster,

When you close CFDs with category moves, could you make sure that the bot leaves a redirect? Because of this closure, we have dozens of broken category redirects that have to be cleaned up now. An example is Category:LGBT history in Africa by country. This happens all of the time with speedy renames but it's now happening with all of the categories that were LGBT that are now LGBTQ. It's past midnight here now so I'm going to leave this work for another admin or editor to handle. But we get broken category redirects every day because the bot doesn't leave a redirect when it moves a category. It would be nice if this practice changed. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:25, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi Liz! If we are going to change the general practice, I think a broader discussion at WT:CFD would be better than at one admin's talk page. When the items are removed from WP:CFDW, part of the admin's job is to update links/delete broken redirects. Spitballing: Perhaps an WP:ADMINBOT could also handle the redirects, updating the target (if the category has been renamed) or deleting it (if the category has been deleted)? Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 18:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, ideally if the bot fixed all incoming links including for redirects, then I agree there probably shouldn't be a need for an old redirect to stay around and it doesn't need to be manually cleaned up by an admin after. Raladic (talk) 18:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-49

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

Updates for editors

• Two new parser functions were added this week. The {{#interwikilink}} function adds an interwiki link and the {{#interlanguagelink}} function adds an interlanguage link. These parser functions are useful on wikis where namespaces conflict with interwiki prefixes. For example, links beginning with MOS: on English Wikipedia conflict with the mos language code prefix of Mooré Wikipedia.
• Starting this week, Wikimedia wikis no longer support connections using old RSA-based HTTPS certificates, specifically rsa-2048. This change is to improve security for all users. Some older, unsupported browser or smartphone devices will be unable to connect; Instead, they will display a connectivity error. See the HTTPS Browser Recommendations page for more-detailed information. All modern operating systems and browsers are always able to reach Wikimedia projects. [1]
• Starting December 16, Flow/Structured Discussions pages will be automatically archived and set to read-only at the following wikis: arwiki, cawiki, frwiki, mediawikiwiki, orwiki, wawiki, wawiktionary, wikidatawiki, zhwiki. This is done as part of StructuredDiscussions deprecation work. If you need any assistance to archive your page in advance, please contact Trizek (WMF). [2]
• This month the Chart extension was deployed to production and is now available on Commons and Testwiki. With the security review complete, pilot wiki deployment is expected to start in the first week of December. You can see a working version on Testwiki and read the November project update for more details.
• View all 23 community-submitted tasks that were resolved last week. For example, a bug with the "Download as PDF" system was fixed. [3]

Updates for technical contributors

• In late February, temporary accounts will be rolled out on at least 10 large wikis. This deployment will have a significant effect on the community-maintained code. This is about Toolforge tools, bots, gadgets, and user scripts that use IP address data or that are available for logged-out users. The Trust and Safety Product team wants to identify this code, monitor it, and assist in updating it ahead of the deployment to minimize disruption to workflows. The team asks technical editors and volunteer developers to help identify such tools by adding them to this list. In addition, review the updated documentation to learn how to adjust the tools. Join the discussions on the project talk page or in the dedicated thread on the Wikimedia Community Discord server (in English) for support and to share feedback.

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

MediaWiki message delivery 22:20, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

A fox for you!

you seem pretty cool! thank you for spending so much time making wikipedia a nicer place

Johnsamman (talk) 05:36, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Aww, thank you, Johnsamman! Hope you stick around :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 05:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2024).

Administrator changes

• Ahecht
• DoubleGrazing
• Dr vulpes
• FOARP
• Peaceray
• Queen of Hearts
• Rsjaffe
• SD0001
• SilverLocust
• Sohom Datta
• ThadeusOfNazereth
• Voorts

• Ajpolino
• Fathoms Below
• Pppery
• Tamzin
• Worm That Turned

• Aervanath
• Christopher Sundita
• Dank
• Dennis Brown
• Dragons flight
• Fastily
• Graham87
• JaGa
• Kbh3rd
• Marine 69-71
• Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington
• Yamamoto Ichiro

Interface administrator changes

• SD0001
• Sohom Datta

Pppery

CheckUser changes

• Spicy
• TheresNoTime

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RFC, the policy on restoration of adminship has been updated. All former administrators may now only regain the tools following a request at the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard within 5 years of their most recent admin action. Previously this applied only to administrators deysopped for inactivity.
• Following a request for comment, a new speedy deletion criterion, T5, has been enacted. This applies to template subpages that are no longer used.

Technical news

• Technical volunteers can now register for the 2025 Wikimedia Hackathon, which will take place in Istanbul, Turkey. Application for travel and accommodation scholarships is open from November 12 to December 10, 2024.

Arbitration

• The arbitration case Yasuke (formerly titled Backlash to diversity and inclusion) has been closed.
• An arbitration case titled Palestine-Israel articles 5 has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case will close on 14 December.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Question from Bailey's Wiki Editing Account (19:13, 4 December 2024)

Hi! How do I do create a well-made citation? --Bailey's Wiki Editing Account (talk) 19:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello Bailey's Wiki Editing Account, and welcome to Wikipedia! To create a well-made citation, you can follow the steps at Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor. The more information you are able to fill out in the form, the better! Make sure you are citing reliable sources; we have a list of sources by reliability. The list is far from complete, so don't worry if your source is not on the list! If you have any additional questions, feel free to ask :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 19:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Category:FM-Class articles

Hello, HouseBlaster,

Once again, we have a number of categories which should have had articles and categories moved to them by User:JJMC89 bot III that weren't and they are empty. For example FM-Class cardiology pages is empty and it should have pages from Category:FM-Class cardiology articles moved to it on December 1st but they weren't. Should I give you a list of categories? Or go to someone else or post this on a talk page related to CFD? It seems like this happens mostly with Speedy Renames. Thank you for tolerating all of my category questions. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:12, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi Liz! I am going to ping MSGJ to take a look at this. They are both the {{WikiProject banner}} guru and the person who originally suggested the rename. MSGJ, would you be able to update the module now that all of the categories have been renamed? Thanks, HouseBlaster (he/they) 15:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes it's on my priority list. Hoping to get to it later today! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

We still have Category:FM-Class cardiology pages and Category:FM-Class toxicology pages that keep showing up on the Empty Categories queries we do on Quarry. I think they need some tending to. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:10, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I'll ping MSGJ. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:11, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I added {{empty cat}} to the latter. Don't see an issue with the former? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:22, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Question from Picaro31 (16:44, 6 December 2024)

Hello HouseBlaster.

According to the Wikipedia Conflict of Interest policy (COI), self-edits are prohibited. I'm in a situation where an article that I'm actively editing is being self-edited (as in, the person the article is about is editing their own article).

Additionally, I have no way of confirming if they are the real person or an impersonator, since they haven't referenced their Wikipedia account on any of their social media pages. The only thing I'm going off of is the fact that they have their name as their username.

So I'll just get to the point: What exactly should I do in this situation? I'm assuming it would either be to,

A) Report self-edits B) Leave the policy violation alone C) Undo their self-written contributions to their own article

Thanks! --Picaro31 (talk) 16:44, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi Picaro31! What is their username? Per WP:REALNAME, account using the names of "famous" people (including anyone with an article about themselves) needs to be blocked until they either change their name or verify that they are the person in question.

In the future, you should first try talking to the person and explaining WP:COI. If they are not willing or unable to adapt their behavior, you can report them to WP:ANI. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 00:46, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey HouseBlaster, thanks for the response

I am referring to video game composer Tee Lopes, their username simply being @Teelopes. I'll add a topic to their talk page addressing WP:COI, as well as requesting proof of identity.

Thanks! Picaro31 (talk) 05:34, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

CFD closure advice

Hey @HouseBlaster,

I would like to contribute by closing some simple and straightforward CfD nominations. As a non admin, what advice or suggestion would you give me for starting my journey?

For simple merges or renames, after moving the cat, what csd should I tag for the redirect? For cats with very less pages I just plant to use my AWB alt to do the renaming or merging, but for the larger cats should I use User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/CFDlister? Does it work for list at the talk page for non-admins?

Thanks for your time! ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 12:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi Bunnypranav! Thank you so much for volunteering to help out at CFD. It is really appreciated :)

You have already picked up on what my advice would be: closing some simple and straightforward CfD nominations. These are generally the unanimous ones with at least one support besides the nominator. The next most complex is knowing when WP:SILENCE applies to an unopposed nomination; sometimes these should be relisted and sometimes they should be soft deleted/merged/renamed/etc. It is more of an art than a science, but I generally relist large bundled nominations and close nominations of 1–3 categories after a week. Beyond those two examples, you should follow the process for determining consensus in the discussion.

As for processing them manually, because you are not yet a page mover, you cannot actually move categories with Special:Move. Please do not do a cut/paste move, and if you have already done any cut/paste moves please request a history merge. CFDlister, which is designed for non-admins, lists discussions at WT:CFDW so admins can process them. This should be done for all moves until you acquire the page mover permission. If you do any merge or delete nomination manually, {{db-xfd}} is the appropriate CSD tag.

I think that is everything; let me know if you have any questions and I would be happy to help

Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 23:28, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

@HouseBlaster Thanks for the detailed response

As a non-page mover, can I close as rename, edit the few pages (maybe like 10 or so) by hand or AWB, move the cat, and db-xfd the the redirect? ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 05:18, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

@Bunnypranav: You cannot. The page mover permission is required by the software to move categories; see Wikipedia:Page mover § move-categorypages. Try visiting Special:MovePage/Category:X1 to see what I mean. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 05:24, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I assumed that it was like moving article pages. Thanks again for your advice! ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 05:34, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Violation

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.

---

Hello HouseBlaster, hope you're well. Aren't these diffs [4], [5], [6], violations of the user's tban that you're enforced as an unblock condition? The article even has whole separate sections for Armenia and Azerbaijan, I think this clearly shows the user's incompetency to abide by the topic ban. Additionally, they've added Azeri script here (Qar Qızı). Vanezi (talk) 11:25, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Those edits to Ded Moroz are not topic ban violations given that Viceskeeni2 did not touch the section of the article about Armenia or Azerbaijan. I am unwilling to block someone over a one-time incidient of adding Azeri script, but Viceskeeni2: This edit was a topic ban violation. Do not do it again, or I will be forced to reblock you. I know editing with a topic ban can be difficult, but you agreed to be bound by a topic ban. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 18:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Okay, didn't know this counts as a violation. My bad, sorry, I won't do it again until those 3 months are up and I can make a request. Viceskeeni2 (talk) 18:59, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Are you really checking my edits to see if I edit on Azerbaijan/Armenia to get me blocked... I don't want to say anything, but alright. Viceskeeni2 (talk) 19:00, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Are you asking an obvious question that was answered to you already once about adhering to restrictions [7]? If you really "don't want to" say anything, you're welcome to not say anything. Vanezi (talk) 19:19, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Crazy. And then I'm the one who has people living rent free in his head. Viceskeeni2 (talk) 19:25, 8 December 2024 (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.

Violation 2

@HouseBlaster You've collapsed the thread above, hope you don't mind me opening another discussion because the user violated their conditional topic ban again and hounding me in the process [8]; FYI, the RfC discussion that Viceskeeni2 is replying to me in (never taking part in it before me btw, and I made a single comment just today) is about inclusion or exclusion (and other options) of Armenian genocide in the lead of Turkey. And the sources in my comment which Viceskeeni2 is replying to ALL talk about Armenia. The user has no competence and regard to the topic ban, violating or dancing around it constantly even after you just warned them about it. What do you and the admin blocking Viceskeeni2, @Rosguill, think about this? Vanezi (talk) 20:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

[9] does this look like someone who's competent or in good faith? They're literally commenting under an RFC about Armenian genocide and saying they're not topic banned from Turkey, and hounding opposing my comments for the second time now. Vanezi (talk) 20:28, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

@Vanezi Astghik: Generally, collapsing threads indicates that the conversation is over. That was the intended effect of my action, so I am a little concerned that you immediately opened a new thread. I seriously contemplated issuing an interaction ban between you two, and if the bad blood continues I will do so. You are not the enforcer of Viceskeeni2's topic ban, and it is very clear that your goal is to get them re-blocked.

@Viceskeeni2:, I can't comment on the last one because I'm not allowed to, but that one doesn't talk about Turkey either is also a topic ban violation. Saying putting "I can't say this but..." does not make whatever follow not a get out of jail free card to violating your topic ban, and if I had discovered this independent of Vanezi's hounding I would have indefinitely blocked you for it; I warned you less than an hour before you made that comment. If part of a conversation concerns Armenia or Azerbaijan, you cannot participate in it. It doesn't matter that Turkey is also involved. If someone pings you to the discussion, you may make a single post saying "I am not allowed to participate due to my topic ban". You may not elaborate any further. The next time I will indefinitely block you again. I want to see you continue to contribute productively, but you need to follow your topic ban. HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:31, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Okay Viceskeeni2 (talk) 20:36, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

You are not the enforcer of Viceskeeni2's topic ban, and it is very clear that your goal is to get them re-blocked. Dear HouseBlaster, I don't agree with your accusation. My goal is for everyone, including myself, to adhere to our policies and so forth. What is the wrong in that? You are the admin who unblocked them with a tban; I had prior experience with the user and users under tbans are expected that others may look at so they don't violate it, that's completely normal. I saw evidence of violation and brought it to your talk page as you're the enforcing admin (again completely normal interaction and happened many times on Wikipedia), you then collapsed the thread before new evidence occurred. What was I supposed to do then? I didn't bring this to ANI out of respect to you, I first wanted to show you the evidence as the tban enforcing admin.

And that even after you warned them here, they not only showed further incompetence and violated the tban again, but also hounded me in the process with subpar "analysis" of my RFC comment [10], saying my sources don't talk about Turkey when the genocide happened in Ottoman Empire and Turkey is literally the successor state after the genocide – do you know how incredibly disrespectful and outright disingenuous that reply is from Viceskeeni2? Especially from someone clearly aware about the region, and someone that shouldn't even comment in the discussion? What did you expect me to do after seeing this hounding disingenuous comment, NOT to inform you, the enforcing admin, of yet another violation minutes after I had a discussion here? I'm sorry but I disagree with you, I think Viceskeeni2 has been given too much rope at this point. Vanezi (talk) 20:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't know, maybe because I'm the only user whose violations you inform him about. Like I siad, I already apologized for doing it because I didn't know those two were included in the topic ban on Armenia/Azerbaijan. I have been doing edits in the last time, that have nothing to do with the topic I'm banned from, and whe nI do one small mistake (which is giving the name of some character in Azerbaijani), bam you immediately repor tme. It's clear you're trying to get be re-banned. It's not your job to inform admins about it, why don't you inform them about other violkations? Yes, you had prior experience with me, that prior experience being immediately reporting every small violation I make to some admin to get me banned. Do it with other editors to if your goal is "for everyone to adhere to our policies and so forth" Viceskeeni2 (talk) 20:58, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Request review of CFD close on Category:Yeniseysk

Do agree with the decision at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 October 27#Category:Yeniseysk, but believe a spelling error was unintentionally introduced. The cat was moved to Category:People from Yeniseyk as suggested in the CFD. The town is actually called Yeniseysk (an s before the k.) Would you consider boldly moving to Category:People from Yeniseysk instead?--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 23:20, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi! I have nominated it for speedy renaming. Thank you for catching that typo :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 23:57, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Question from Olothando mabuto on Wikipedia talk:Main Page alternatives/(Old PDA version) (04:12, 9 December 2024)

Hello Wh --Olothando mabuto (talk) 04:12, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello Olothando mabuto, and welcome to Wikipedia. I don't think you finished typing your question; feel free to either submit another one or reply here. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 05:11, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Question from Monárquico1975 (16:49, 9 December 2024)

Hello Jony, I would like to ask in what forum one would best explain how an article I got very angry over could be improved? Maybe you have a link. Thank you in advance --Monárquico1975 (talk) 16:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello Monárquico1975, and welcome to Wikipedia! The best way to improve an article you got very angry about is to be bold and do it yourself! Help:Getting started has some advice, and I am here to answer any questions you might have. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 16:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I already got started. I will ask if something weird comes up.

One other question:I thought this was a totally private message to my "mentor" that was named ZI Jony. Could you censor my first name in the text above? Monárquico1975 (talk) 17:11, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Done. HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Question from Jordanttran (20:39, 9 December 2024)

Hello I'm apart of Valentino Khan's management team. I made a request for changes to be made to his wikipedia account. When will it finalize? --Jordanttran (talk) 20:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

You have not submitted an edit request; you should do so by following these instructions. Only edit requests are reviewed; the oldest one in the queue has been sitting there for a month. Your changes need to be backed up by citations to secondary, reliable sources; YouTube is not a reliable source. Primary source citations are only allowed occasionally, and all the sources you listed at the talk page are entirely primary. You will need to fix that before submitting an edit request unless you want it to be declined.

I will warn you: Paid editing is very much frowned upon here. We are a volunteer service, and you are not the first, second, thousandth, or even ten thousandth person to try paid editing. You should read this essay on the topic of paid editing, this other essay on when your boss tells you to edit Wikipedia, the entirety of the reliable source guideline, and the "words to watch" guideline. It is a lot of reading, but this is the reality of paid editing on Wikipedia. It is not easy, and is probably not worth your time. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Is there a way to not make myself a paid editor? I just want his page to be updated. Jordanttran (talk) 23:06, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

@Jordanttran: Short of quitting your job, no. As long as you are working as part of Khan's management team, you are considered a paid editor. HouseBlaster (he/they) 23:08, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-50

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

Weekly highlight

• Technical documentation contributors can find updated resources, and new ways to connect with each other and the Wikimedia Technical Documentation Team, at the Documentation hub on MediaWiki.org. This page links to: resources for writing and improving documentation, a new #wikimedia-techdocs IRC channel on libera.chat, a listing of past and upcoming documentation events, and ways to request a documentation consultation or review. If you have any feedback or ideas for improvements to the documentation ecosystem, please contact the Technical Documentation Team.

Updates for editors

Layout change for the Edit Check feature

• Later this week, Edit Check will be relocated to a sidebar on desktop. Edit check is the feature for new editors to help them follow policies and guidelines. This layout change creates space to present people with new Checks that appear while they are typing. The initial results show newcomers encountering Edit Check are 2.2 times more likely to publish a new content edit that includes a reference and is not reverted.
• The Chart extension, which enables editors to create data visualizations, was successfully made available on MediaWiki.org and three pilot wikis (Italian, Swedish, and Hebrew Wikipedias). You can see a working examples on Testwiki and read the November project update for more details.
• Translators in wikis where the mobile experience of Content Translation is available, can now discover articles in Wikiproject campaigns of their interest from the "All collection" category in the articles suggestion feature. Wikiproject Campaign organizers can use this feature, to help translators to discover articles of interest, by adding the <page-collection> </page-collection> tag to their campaign article list page on Meta-wiki. This will make those articles discoverable in the Content Translation tool. For more detailed information on how to use the tool and tag, please refer to the step-by-step guide. [11]
• The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, now has a multiselect filter for namespace selection. This enables users to select multiple specific namespaces, instead of only one or all, when fetching pages for deletion.
• The Nuke feature also now provides links to the userpage of the user whose pages were deleted, and to the pages which were not selected for deletion, after page deletions are queued. This enables easier follow-up admin-actions. Thanks to Chlod and the Moderator Tools team for both of these improvements. [12]
• The Editing Team is working on making it easier to populate citations from archive.org using the Citoid tool, the auto-filled citation generator. They are asking communities to add two parameters preemptively, archiveUrl and archiveDate, within the TemplateData for each citation template using Citoid. You can see an example of a change in a template, and a list of all relevant templates. [13]
• One new wiki has been created: a Wikivoyage in Indonesian (voy:id:) [14]
• Last week, all wikis had problems serving pages to logged-in users and some logged-out users for 30–45 minutes. This was caused by a database problem, and investigation is ongoing. [15]
• View all 19 community-submitted tasks that were resolved last week. For example, a bug in the Add Link feature has been fixed. Previously, the list of sections which are excluded from Add Link was partially ignored in certain cases. [16][17]

Updates for technical contributors

• Codex, the design system for Wikimedia, now has an early-stage implementation in PHP. It is available for general use in MediaWiki extensions and Toolforge apps through Composer, with use in MediaWiki core coming soon. More information is available in the documentation. Thanks to Doğu for the inspiration and many contributions to the library. [18]
• Wikimedia REST API users, such as bot operators and tool maintainers, may be affected by ongoing upgrades. On December 4, the MediaWiki Interfaces team began rerouting page/revision metadata and rendered HTML content endpoints on testwiki from RESTbase to comparable MediaWiki REST API endpoints. The team encourages active users of these endpoints to verify their tool's behavior on testwiki and raise any concerns on the related Phabricator ticket before the end of the year, as they intend to roll out the same change across all Wikimedia projects in early January. These changes are part of the work to replace the outdated RESTBase system.
• The 2024 Developer Satisfaction Survey is seeking the opinions of the Wikimedia developer community. Please take the survey if you have any role in developing software for the Wikimedia ecosystem. The survey is open until 3 January 2025, and has an associated privacy statement.
• There is no new MediaWiki version this week. [19]

Meetings and events

• The next meeting in the series of Wikimedia Foundation discussions with the Wikimedia Commons community will take place on December 12 at 8:00 UTC and at 16:00 UTC. The topic of this call is new media and new contributors. Contributors from all wikis are welcome to attend.

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

MediaWiki message delivery 22:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Question from StarsinAirI (19:22, 10 December 2024)

Hi! I am working on a number of provenance research projects. One of my plans is to create a page for the Center for Art Law. No rush. The organization is a nonprofit -- itsartlaw.org --StarsinAirI (talk) 19:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

StarsinAirI: Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! To qualify for an article, the Center for Art Law must meet our notability guideline for organizations. You can read about that at Help:Your first article § Notability – should this topic have an article?

Having read that section, do you have two or three reliable sources which meet all three of the criteria? Thanks, HouseBlaster (he/they) 21:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

But how long does it take Amogelang22 (talk) 14:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Indeed there are many:

Law schools and Libraries in multiple higher education schools list the Center as a resource (eg.

https://fitnyc.libguides.com/c.php?g=878494&p=6309617

https://lawlibguides.luc.edu/artandculturalproperty

https://www.law.berkeley.edu/experiential/pro-bono-program/slps/current-slps-projects/arts-and-innovation-representation/

https://guides.brooklaw.edu/art_law/organizations

There has been coverage in the news:

https://abovethelaw.com/2019/06/new-yorks-art-law-center-looks-to-empower-creators/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewerskine/2023/12/04/the-center-for-art-law-report-on-anti-money-laundering-and-art-review/

https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-despite-graffitis-global-popularity-cities-criminalize

https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2020/03/27/us-copyright-law-comes-under-scrutiny-as-new-legislation-makes-its-way-before-congress

https://news.artnet.com/art-world/editors-picks-june-13-2022-2125449

Links to the Center's expertise have been made/posted by other independent organizations (eg.

https://nationalsculpture.org/opportunity/center-for-art-law/

https://1995unidroitcap.org/center-for-art-law/

https://artinres.com/articles/free-and-affordable-legal-resources-for-artists-by-state StarsinAirI (talk) 19:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

@StarsinAirI: Alright! Let me share my analysis of these sources. We only want coverage in the news; citations to the Center are not considered. Therefore, I have focused on that part:

Created with templates {{ORGCRIT assess table}} and {{ORGCRIT assess}}
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor.

Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Secondary?	Overall value toward ORGCRIT
https://abovethelaw.com/2019/06/new-yorks-art-law-center-looks-to-empower-creators/			Full-length article on the subject
https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewerskine/2023/12/04/the-center-for-art-law-report-on-anti-money-laundering-and-art-review/		Written by a Forbes contributor, which are considered generally unreliable due to minimal fact-checking	Full-length article on the subject
https://www.artsy.net/article/artsy-editorial-despite-graffitis-global-popularity-cities-criminalize		Not sure whether this is considered reliable	Does not talk about the Center as an organization; we need more than name drops
https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2020/03/27/us-copyright-law-comes-under-scrutiny-as-new-legislation-makes-its-way-before-congress			Trivial mention; we need more than a name drop
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/editors-picks-june-13-2022-2125449		I cannot tell if they have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy	We need multiple paragraphs' worth of information; this not even a single full paragraph

We have one reliable source which meets all three of the criteria I gave you, but we need some more. Do you have any others like that first source you shared? Then we will be in business :) HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:57, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes Amogelang22 (talk) 21:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Here are a few others:

https://hyperallergic.com/536499/center-for-art-law-in-new-york-launches-an-immigration-clinic-for-visual-artists/

https://www.artwatchinternational.com/review-f-for-fake/

https://arteza.com/pages/protecting-your-artwork-in-the-age-of-ai-leveraging-the-center-for-art-law

https://secretsofartmagazine.com/2020/01/helping-artists-to-navigate-legal-waters/

https://www.easthamptonstar.com/arts/2021129/estate-planning-artists

https://www.obs-traffic.museum/center-art-law

Events:

https://www.aamg-us.org/artlawcenter/

https://www.clm.com/art-law-judith-wallace-presents-at-the-center-for-art-law/

References:

https://biblioteca.luiss.it/en/resources/center-art-law

https://artinres.com/articles/free-and-affordable-legal-resources-for-artists-by-state

https://copyrightalliance.org/event/copyright-law-clinic-event/

https://www.culturalheritagepartners.com/advice-for-the-next-generation-of-art-and-cultural-heritage-lawyers/

https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/center-for-art-law-irina-tarsis-on-pursuing-art-law/id1519596187?i=1000553831162

https://www.guidestar.org/profile/82-3614849

https://secretsofartmagazine.com/2020/01/helping-artists-to-navigate-legal-waters/

https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1828&context=iplj

https://grantees.brooklynartscouncil.org/2020/center-for-art-law/

https://www.manacontemporary.com/event/art-contracts-101-with-center-for-art-law/

https://www.lexology.com/firms/1242259

https://www.obs-traffic.museum/center-art-law

https://www.familywealthreport.com/article.php/Reviewing-%22Center-for-Art-Law-Report-on-Anti_dash_Money-Laundering-and-Art%22

https://www.pryorcashman.com/events/the-essentials-a-guide-to-artist-dealer-relationships-and-contracts

https://tech.cornell.edu/news/how-an-art-lawyer-found-a-home-at-cornell-tech/

https://www.aals.org/about/publications/newsletters/aals-news-summer-2022/spotlight-section-on-art-law/ StarsinAirI (talk) 05:09, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

StarsinAirI, that is a lot of sources for me to dig through. Would you be able to present the three of them which best meet the criteria? We only need two or three sources, and we already found one. Thanks, HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:43, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Question from Amogelang22 on Teju Babyface (08:43, 11 December 2024)

Hello my mentor Can you help me with the article that I am working on --Amogelang22 (talk) 08:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Amogelang22! I have a very full plate at the moment, so I will have to pass. However, I am more than happy to answer any questions you might have. Best of luck! HouseBlaster (he/they) 14:17, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Can you please check that 1968 Buenos Grand Prix article for me Amogelang22 (talk) 14:34, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

But thanks Amogelang22 (talk) 14:38, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Your edits to 1968 Buenos Aires Grand Prix look great to me! HouseBlaster (he/they) 14:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank Amogelang22 (talk) 16:39, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Your mentorship helped me Amogelang22 (talk) 16:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

<3

you're a kind hearted person, and a good friend. thank you. VortexiusV (talk) 20:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, VortexiusV! HouseBlaster (he/they) 20:58, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

you're welcome !!

(。・ω・。) VortexiusV (talk) 20:59, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Assistance

Hi

I would like to request your assistance. I am trying to follow the rules, but I am new to the acronyms and terminology. Before I get into my request, I want to clarify that my request for arbitration concerns the blocking of information from TMA, not the content of any potential edits. Right now, the dispute concerns the complete blocking of any information from anybody who wants to cite this journal. Therefore, all the comments about promoting myself, COI, paid work, etc. are not part of the dispute. Plus, I have not made any edits to the “collatz conjecture”. All I did was ask people to“consider” possible edits by posting on the “talk” page. I did not have any editing rights at the time or an account with Wikipedia. Any edits would have had to be done by some else. I did not want to get this involved in the process. At the time, I thought Wikipedia pages were only concerned about facts and presenting the latest information. I will state for the record – I have no connection with TMA except I submitted by paper to this journal and they published it. I had not heard of this journal until about 5 months ago.

It was ruled that my request for arbitration was premature. Please let me know what other method/process needs to be considered before going for arbitration. So far, I have contacted Eppstein by private-mail (using an account he disclosed), sent him a copy of my peer-reviewed published paper, presented my proposed edits on the talk page of the collatz conjecture seeking a discussion of the correct wording of any edits (someone closed it after 2 days), tried to file a dispute resolution (closed as not appropriate), send messages to Eppstein’s talk page to discuss his complaints to see if we could come to a compromise (closed), filed a request on “reliable source” page seeking an unbiased, neutral editor to assist in coming to a decision ( presented all the facts showing TMA is not a predatory publication or unreliable source) (closed after a few days), sent email to Wikipedia “office” asking for the assistance of an unbiased, neutral editor (told this was not possible) and finally after a few weeks found the arbitration site, opened an account, made the required edits on various pages that have nothing to do with this issue, and finally filed a request for arbitration. What more do I have to do before I can request arbitration. However, I do not think anything short of arbitration will get Eppstein to consider the facts about TMA.

Before this dispute with Eppstein I had never heard of a predatory publication or whether a scientific journal was or was not a reliable source. I am just using the definitions as written by Wikipedia to base my defense of TMA. If Wikipedia is going require those criteria cited by Eppstein to disallow TMA as a citable journal, then the definitions need to be changed. Until then, I am going to stress that TMA is OK. ISTCC (talk) 21:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi ISTCC. Arbitration is only able to adjudicate conduct issues. Determining whether a source is reliable is a content issue, and therefore will never be ready for arbitration.

As for the complete blocking of any information from anybody who wants to cite this journal, we regularly block sources from use on Wikipedia. Nobody would doubt that we avoiding citing The Onion, for instance, and we have a similar requirement for sources which lack a reputation for fact checking and accuracy. We even have a deprecation process for sources which are unsuitable for any citations. That Wikipedia is systematically refusing to allow citations to a particular journal is nothing out of the ordinary.

You should be careful of forum shopping, which occurs when you keep raising the same question at different venues hoping for a different result. You will be blocked from editing if you continue. Best, HouseBlaster (he/they) 22:19, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

I was not forum shopping. The requirement for arbitration is that the person exhasaut all available methods of resolving the issue before going to arbitration. This is a conduct issue because Eppstein is blocking the journal without support from Wikipedia procedures. There is no content issue because no content is under consideration. The dispute is about the journal TMA only and why it is being blocked. It is a scientific journal with an editorial board with distingiushed scientists, peer-reviewed examination and only modest publishing fees ($200 compared to over $3,000 for the Number Theory journal). There is no reason to block this journal other than a biased opinion, withoiut any first hand knowledge.

I have only been trying to have an unbiased, neutral editor make a decision on TMA. Have them look at the facts, rather then the unsupported statements of people. The definitions written by Wikipedia show TMA is not a predatory publication and it is a reliable scientific journal. However, no one is looking at the facts and just taking the biased opinion of an editor who is citing reasons not listed by Wikipedia. Wikipedia is either a source governed by rules and procedures, or it is a biased source that allows editors to make up reasons to block what they do not like, even if it is true. Tell me, what is the procedure when an editor begins making his own rules and stop people from adding information that meets Wikipedia standards. Do you let him continue without stopping him or do you tell him to follow the rules? I only have been insisting that Wikipedia follows its own rules. That is all. ISTCC (talk) 09:07, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 December 2024

• News and notes: Arbitrator election concludes

• Arbitration report: Palestine-Israel articles 5

• Disinformation report: Sex, power, and money revisited

• Op-ed: On the backrooms

• In focus: Are Wikipedia articles representative of Western or world knowledge?

• In the media: Like the BBC, often useful but not impartial

• Traffic report: Something Wicked for almost everybody

• Opinion: Worm That Turned's reconfirmation RfA debriefing

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)