User talk:StevenJ81/Archive 4

This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.

Invitation to discussion about Per-user page blocking

Hi there,

The Anti-Harassment Tools team is seeking input about building User Page (or category) blocking feature.

We’re inviting you to join the discussion because you voted or commented in the 2015 Community Wishlist Survey about Enhanced per-user / per-article protection / blocking.

You can leave comments on this discussion page or send an email to the Anti-Harassment Tools team.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 23:01, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

Happy 1 Cheshvan

Steven, thank you for your note about Jeroboam's feast. I won't wish you a happy Sukkot for his version in a couple of weeks' time, but I do wish you a happy start of the month of Cheshvan!

- BobKilcoyne (talk) 22:12, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, StevenJ81. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

A friendly note

It's really admiring that you were trying to resolve the issue at Talk:Hanukkah, but "I really wish the two of you would stop squabbling like children" was a comment on the contributor. That's not constructive. Thanks. --Mhhossein ^talk 18:27, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

@Mhhossein: Fair. My apologies. But you are also Wikilawyering to justify your tag bombing, and that's one of the things I have the least patience for. If you are reasonable about whether something is likely to be challenged, that's one thing. But as a different editor said over there, "something likely to be challenged" and "something you choose to challenge" are two different things. And when nobody has challenged the content for two years (in the case of the list of battles) or three years (in the case of the list of characters), the presumption is that this is "something you choose to challenge", not "something likely to be challenged". StevenJ81 (talk) 19:10, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

You don't need to apologize, I should apologize for making you put your valuable time on this matter. Anyway, I really thought that those materials needed a citation. The time-based argument by you is apparently true, but there were many other unchallenged points which were challenged by others (not me) just recently! Please read the disputed sections once again (I know that you've done already done it) and tell me if a sentence like "Elazar the Maccabee is killed in battle. Lysias has success in battle against the Maccabees, but allows them temporary freedom of worship" needs to be cited or not. Do the same for "A Jewish fortress saved by Judas Maccabeus", or "Judas Maccabeus fights the forces of Lysias and Georgias" and etc. Thank you again. --Mhhossein ^talk 19:18, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

@Mhhossein: Take the following in the context that at some point shortly (probably tomorrow) I'm going to reply over there to User:NeilN—whose work I greatly respect—that I think his interpretation is excessively narrow on things like this.

These, to me, are borderline cases. Unquestionably, sources would not be a bad idea for those. At the same time, I don't think a lack of sources is fatal to them, either, and therefore I don't think tags were necessary, especially right before the appearance date.

Here's my reasoning. I didn't really see the presence of a proximate link as suggesting that Wikipedia itself was being treated as a reliable source, though I can see why others are interpreting it that way. Rather, I see these as being simple recitations of a brief factual summary, with details available at the link, and with the target of the link ostensibly fully sourced to support the statement. (That's why I wanted to keep your tags where the targets were unsourced.)

At a certain level, the narrower interpretation espoused by NeilN (and in your tagging) is probably the better approach if the only issue is the pure quality of the encyclopedia and its sourcing. In reality, though, there is some tradeoff between that issue and the fact that the entire encyclopedia is losing contributors. And one reason for that is that many ordinary contributors find the process of improving articles daunting or intimidating, especially when certain individuals get compulsive about their interpretation of policy.

• Look at my contributions. Any article I've substantially written—look at Shemini Atzeret and International date line in Judaism, for two—is well sourced. But Shemini Atzeret was pulled as GA after only a couple of weeks because certain individuals decided they knew better than I did what sources and descriptions might be appropriate—never mind that some of what they wanted was just not really applicable. I got tired of that. So I contribute less here than I used to, and never push pages to GA any more. (I'm clerk to the Language committee now, and sysop on Meta and Incubator. It's not that I don't do things around here.)

Finally, I'll just say that while I appreciate people's desire to have articles that will be linked from the main page to be of as high a quality as possible, rules do not state that only GA-quality articles can be linked. This was a solid, B-class article. And it was certainly our responsibility to address any outstanding issues on the page before it appeared. But when substantial numbers of new tags are added in the two or three days before the scheduled page appearance—and when it's not really clear to us that most of the tags are for unquestionable cases—we can't help feeling as if some parties are explicitly trying to make it impossible for us to address the problems on time. AGF: I hope that wasn't really the case here. But it's much easier to identify problems than to fix them, and identifying lots of "new" problems right before the appearance date is a difficult problem to overcome. We're all volunteers, too, and can't necessarily put aside our day jobs to fix problems right then, after all.

In any event, thank you for listening. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:48, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Look, I understand many of the points you just mentioned and in fact I'm in partial agreement with you, don't forget that such differences are natural and accepted, but the way to handle them is very critical and you've shown to be great at this. Steven, I read your words two or three times and thought about them! The only thing I can tell you at the moment is that I believe that the article was not really eligible for the main page when I tagged it, at the very beginning. There were multiple, if not many, unsourced paragraphs and sentences which needed to be sourced. On my part, I can tell you that there were no attempt aimed at intentionally avoiding this specific article, rather I was trying the reach the quality up to the minimum level accepted for the main page. Meanwhile, I was treated like a vandal! Never mind! Anyway, the result of these back-and-forth is now a better article, isn't it?

Having done some GAs myself, I can guess what you said regarding the de-listing of Shemini Atzeret. You're welcome, listening was the least thing I could do. Looking forward to see your words regarding NeilN's comment. Regards. --Mhhossein ^talk 19:08, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

transliteration schemes - Hannukkah - in reference to your comment

/X/ is the YIVO sound transliterated as kh or the German "ch as in Bach" more commonly. [X] is the symbol used in transcription with the International Phonetic Alphabet for that sound, undoubtedly for the reason you cited.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hanukkah&oldid=prev&diff=815570524 MichelleInSanMarcos (talk) 22:32, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@MichelleInSanMarcos: Fair point. I'm not sure that's entirely inconsistent with my comment; the YIVO system is "an academic transcription system", looked at one way. Probably the only time that I have personally seen "that holiday" spelled with an "X" is in transcriptions of Yiddish using YIVO. (There was such a transcription in the issue of Pakn Treger—a Yiddish Book Center publication—that came out right about the same time I wrote that comment.) Again, it's not something someone would see very frequently if the body text is in English. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:09, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Upcoming changes to wikitext parsing

Hello,

There will be some changes to the way wikitext is parsed during the next few weeks. It will affect all namespaces. You can see a list of pages that may display incorrectly at Special:LintErrors. Since most of the easy problems have already been solved at the English Wikipedia, I am specifically contacting tech-savvy editors such as yourself with this one-time message, in the hope that you will be able to investigate the remaining high-priority pages during the next month.

There are approximately 10,000 articles (and many more non-article pages) with high-priority errors. The most important ones are the articles with misnested tags and table problems. Some of these involve templates, such as infoboxes, or the way the template is used in the article. In some cases, the "error" is a minor, unimportant difference in the visual appearance. In other cases, the results are undesirable. You can see a before-and-after comparison of any article by adding ?action=parsermigration-edit to the end of a link, like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Foss?action=parsermigration-edit (which shows a difference in how {{infobox ship}} is parsed).

If you are interested in helping with this project, please see Wikipedia:Linter. There are also some basic instructions (and links to even more information) at https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-ambassadors/2018-April/001836.html You can also leave a note at WT:Linter if you have questions.

Thank you for all the good things you do for the English Wikipedia. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Help us design granular blocks!

Hello :-) The Anti-Harassment Tools team at the Wikimedia Foundation will start building these granular blocking tools in a few weeks and we've asked WMF designer Alex Hollender to help us make some wireframes so the tools are intuitive to MediaWiki users.

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T190350

We have a first draft of how we think this tool should work. You can read the full proposed implementation here but here are the significant parts:

• Granular blocks (page, category, namespace, and file uploading) will be built on top of Special:Block. These blocks will function as if they were regular blocks and allow for the same options, but only take effect on specific pages.
• We will add a new checkbox for "Block this user from the whole site" which will be checked by default. When it is unchecked the admin will be able to specify which pages, categories, and/or namespaces the user should be blocked from editing.
• Granular blocks can be combined and/or overlap. (For example, a user could be simultaneously blocked from editing the articles Rain, Thunder, Lightning, and all pages inside the Category:Weather.)
• Only one block is set at a time, to adjust what the user is blocked from the administrator would have to modify the existing block.
• Block logs should display information about the granular block
• When a blocked user attempts to edit an applicable page, they should see a block warning message which include information on their block (reason, expiration, what they are blocked from, etc.)
• If a category is provided, the blocked user cannot edit either the category page itself and all pages within the category.
• If the File: namespace is blocked, the user should not be allowed to upload files.

We like this direction because it builds on top of the existing block system, both a technical and usability wise. Before we get too far along with designs and development we'd like to hear from you about our prosposal:

1. What do you think of the proposed implementation?
2. We believe this should be an expansion of Special:Block, but it has been suggested that this be a new special page. What are your thoughts?
3. Should uploading files be combined with a File namespace block, or as a separate option? (For example, if combined, when a user is blocked from the File namespace, they would neither be able to edit any existing pages in the File namespace nor upload new files.)
4. Should there be a maximum number of things to be blocked from? Or should we leave it up to admin discretion?

We appreciate your feedback on this project's talk page or by email. For the Anti-Harassment Tools team, SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Trust and Safety Specialist, Community health initiative (talk) 20:54, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

My poem is bad but my apology for the bad links is sincere!

Roses are red,
Good message links are blue,
My proofreading stinks,
So here's a good link for you SPoore (WMF), Trust & Safety, Community health initiative (talk) 16:30, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

.

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thank you, for closing the debate on the shut down of Classical Chinese Wikipedia with valid arguments and reasons. I was the admin of that project for a year and rank the 2nd in terms of the number of edits. The project does mean something to me I guess, although I am no longer active there. Sunzhai (talk) 11:20, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

@損齋: That's very kind of you. Thank you. StevenJ81 (talk) 18:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Request edit to "Hebrew calendar" page (as it is locked)

Shalom StevenJ81 and may HaShem grant you a joyous fast today.

"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_calendar" under the section: Components/Weeks/"Names of weekdays": incorrectly reads "One day (יוֹם אֶחָד‬) in Genesis 1:15 is translated in JPS as first day" whereas the correct reference is "Genesis 1:5".

This page is currently locked, but I noticed you seem to have moderated for this page and have access to it.

Shalom — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.157.63 (talk) 07:01, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure I would characterize the day as joyous (in absence of Mashiach). But that was a good catch, and I have fixed it. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:21, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Lang-yi-dual

Template:Lang-yi-dual has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Trappist the monk (talk) 14:37, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

@Trappist the monk: Responded there. Thank you for letting me know. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:56, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

{{Hebrew year}}

Hello - Module:Calendar_date/Events now includes code that runs {{Hebrew year}} (search on field datasource), sort of like a plugin. The "YYYY" is a macro, replaced with the year in question. The Hebrew year/rhdatum code is then executed real-time by {{moveable date}}. I had trouble with Tisha B'Av the calculations were not working when compared to dates at hebcal.com every few years it was off by one day - do you know what other holidays might not work, within the Adar<->Cheshvan boundaries described earlier? Any you know of will save me time verifying dates. Thanks, -- GreenC 20:25, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

It can also optionally leave a citation:

{{calendar date|holiday=Yom Kippur|year=2024|cite=}}

Sunset, 11 October 2024 – nightfall, 12 October 2024

References

-- GreenC 20:31, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

• Fast days (other than Yom Kippur) move if they naturally land on a Saturday. Tisha B'Av, 17 Tammuz and Tzom Gedaliah then delay to the following day (Sunday); Fast of Esther advances to the preceding Thursday.
• Yom Ha'Atzma'ut is actually rarely on its proper date—only when it falls on a Wednesday. When it falls on Friday or Saturday it moves to the preceding Thursday; when it falls on Monday it is delayed until Tuesday.
• Yom HaZikaron is always the day before Yom Ha'Atzma'ut. Yom HaShoah is always a week before that.

That's it, I think. StevenJ81 (talk) 20:59, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Collaboration on Talmudic tractate articles

I have noticed that many of the articles on individual tractates in the Talmud are sorely in need of expansion and improvement. Examples of these poor articles include Gittin (tractate), Ketubot (tractate), and Makkot to name just a few. If you are willing to collaborate with me to help improve them, please let me know. Also, I kindly request that you bring this to the attention of other members of WikiProject Judaism, and WikiProject Books. Thank you - Alternate Side Parking (talk) 23:07, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, StevenJ81. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Kosher foods + Kashrut

Why are there two articles about the same subject? Kashrut applies to food. Kosher foods follow Kashrut. I'm sure its been discussed in the past, Can you point me to such a discussion? I honestly can't think of a single reason to keep both pages.... Thanks! Hydromania (talk) 04:58, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

@Hydromania: I'll be darned. I looked carefully through Talk:Kosher foods and Talk:Kashrut, including archives, and found no previous mention of this. How strange! At first I wondered if Kosher foods was more oriented toward the hashgacha (supervision) industry and Kashrut towards the laws, but they do appear to be covering the same ground.

I suspect, by the way, that this happened because many people have unsuccessfully proposed moving Kashrut to Kosher because "kosher" is a more recognized word. But "kosher" is an adjective, not a noun, so it's hard to say it should be the name of the article all by itself. Kosher food gets "kosher" into the page title.

Feel free to propose merging the two articles. The instructions are on the linked page, and be sure also to notify WT:JUDAISM (the WikiProject Judaism talk page). I'd support the proposal. Do keep in mind the following:

• Kashrut is an older article, and is a Good article. In general, I would assume that it will be the surviving page. (This would be true even if Kosher foods ends up being the name of the article. It would be better to merge the newer, less well-developed page into the older, superior page first, and then rename. Note that I would oppose such a move.)
• In the process of the merger, do try to see if there is material in Kosher foods that isn't really found in Kashrut and try to incorporate it. (I'm really talking about content, along with any supporting references for that content. You don't necessarily need to make sure that every reference gets moved over, if the surviving article already has an appropriate reference.)

Any questions, please ping. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:19, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

thanks for responding. Wow! I can't believe both articles have lasted as such.

Now that we're fairly certain there was no prior discussion I will definitely propose the merger and work on it. But I plan on doing that after the weekend.

• I agree on Kashrut as the surviving page.
• In regards to the name, I recognize the fact that kosher is a much more prevalent term. But as you noted it is an adjective (and to a lesser extent a verb) and inaccurate.

Let's move further discussion to the talk page.

Hydromania (talk) 22:37, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Counsel about a wrong Special:Statistics page

In the Bulgarian Wikinews, George Ho noticed that the Special:Statistics page shows wrong results. For example, it shows only 66 pages in the main namespace, while there actually are well over 1000. Could you counsel me whom I am to notify about this problem? Thanks in advance. -- Григор Гачев (talk) 19:09, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@Григор Гачев: I think you'd need to put in a bug report at Phabricator. Note, though: I'm pretty that function works by counting hyperlinks between pages. If most of the pages there do not link to any other pages there, you're probably going to have a problem. (Don't ask me further questions about how that works; I really don't fully understand it.) StevenJ81 (talk) 14:47, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Portal:szy on translatewiki.net

Hi, @StevenJ81: Can you provide any insight regarding the discussion at Thread:Support/Sakizaya (https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Thread:Support/Sakizaya)? Corainn (talk) 09:21, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

@Corainn: I answered over there. Things just sometimes take time, and this may or may not be the highest-priority item they have to deal with.

PS: You don't have to ping me from my own talk page; I automatically get a notification. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:52, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Natti Natasha

Thanks for reviewing that - I looked for a reliable source either way and couldn't find one. Also, the IP editor changed the info box and lead paragraph, but not the "early life" paragraph. I would have rejected it on that alone! Psu256 (talk) 14:20, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

@Psu256: Glad to help. Frankly, I absolutely hate celebrity pages. I don't know anything about most of them, and don't want to get involved in these subjects that some people are so passionate about. But I could easily reject this one based on the editor's own comments, so I did. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:23, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

I noticed that it doesn't have the BLP template on it, should that get added? Psu256 (talk) 15:01, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

@Psu256: Absolutely. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:09, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)