|Archived talk pages|
|2005||Jan-Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul-Aug Sep Oct-Dec|
|2006||Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec|
|2007||Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec|
|2008||Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec|
|2009||Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec|
|2010||Jan Feb Mar-May Jun-Jul Aug-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2011||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2012||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2013||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2014||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2015||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2016||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2017||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2018||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2019||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2020||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2021||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun current|
Please add items to the bottom of this page. I will normally reply on this page to any conversation started here.
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).
- Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
- An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.
- IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.
- The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).
- You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.
Discretionary sanction review requested by user
This is to make you aware of a arbitration enforcement action appeal by TillermanJimW. See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Arbitration enforcement action appeal by TillermanJimW. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 07:45, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've added my piece there.-gadfium 08:31, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).
- Feedback is requested on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement draft by the Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2 drafting committee.
- A RfC is open on whether to allow administrators to use extended confirmed protection on high-risk templates.
- A discussion is open to decide when, if ever, should discord logs be eligible for removal when posted onwiki (including whether to oversight them)
- A RfC on the next steps after the trial of pending changes on TFAs has resulted in a 30 day trial of automatic semi protection for TFAs.
- The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.
- The 2021 RfA review is now open for comments.
Marotiri - why are four rocks significant?
Hello, old friend!
- I didn't see your comment; I don't watchlist every article I edit. I tend to agree that the community of 327 people with a primary school and a statistical area with over 2,000 people named after it is of more significance that 4 rocks in an isolated area. To make a case for the primary topic would require doing a few internet searches, and the rock article, having been on Wikipedia since 2005, might still win as the better known use of the name. I don't think it's worth the time to make the case. I've added a hatnote to the rock article. The Gisborne mountain doesn't have an article as far as I'm aware, so no hatnote is needed for the locality.-gadfium 00:43, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
- When I come across those things, I usually simply move the article that's hogging the primary topic and use the empty spot for a dab page. But I do check pageviews first, and whilst that's not the be and end all, in this case it does favour the rocks, I'm afraid. Schwede66 00:58, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
I just requested semi-protection for this page in the light of the attention it is currently attracting. You may want to keep an eye on it in the meantime. 10mmsocket (talk) 09:02, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for that, and for your edit to make the page more neutral. Having made two reverts, I'm not planning on taking further action on the page tonight.-gadfium 09:12, 6 September 2021 (UTC)