User talk:Metropolitan90/Archive 28
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 |
Administrators' newsletter – August 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, the page Wikipedia:Office actions has been changed from a policy page to an information page.
- A request for comment (permalink) is in progress regarding the administrator inactivity policy.
Arbitration
- Editors may now use the template {{Ds/aware}} to indicate that they are aware that discretionary sanctions are in force for a topic area, so it is unnecessary to alert them.
Miscellaneous
- Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
- The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.
Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.
Administrators' newsletter – September 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).
Administrator changes
Bradv • Chetsford • Izno
Floquenbeam • Lectonar
DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
- Callanecc • Fox • HJ Mitchell • LFaraone • There'sNoTime
Technical news
- Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
- The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.
Arbitration
- A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2019 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
Miscellaneous
- A global request for comment is in progress regarding whether a user group should be created that could modify edit filters across all public Wikimedia wikis.
Happy Adminship Anniversary!
| Happy Adminship | from the Birthday Committee | |
|---|---|---|
  Wishing Metropolitan90 a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! | ||
Administrators' newsletter – October 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which
applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories
.
- Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which
Technical news
- As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.
Arbitration
- The 2019 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place October 4th to 10th.
- The arbitration case regarding Fram was closed. While there will be a local RfC
focus[ing] on how harassment and private complaints should be handled in the future
, there is currently a global community consultation on partial and temporary office actions in response to the incident. It will be open until October 30th.
Miscellaneous
- The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.
Kansas City
(Same person who put it up there) Don’t you think it’s less confusing if it goes in the beginning? People don’t understand the difference between Kansas City Kansas and Johnson County Kansas. Not trying to be confusing or annoying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 04:49, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
- I wanted to move that around because I had gone to the article to find out what county Kansas City, Missouri was in. Since "Johnson County" was the first county mentioned, I misread it and though that was the name of the county where KCMO is located. It turned out that KCMO is actually (mostly) in the similar-sounding "Jackson County". I know that some people might confuse Kansas City, Missouri with Kansas City, Kansas, but Johnson County is a completely different name and doesn't seem likely to be confused with either of them. I haven't seen any other leads of articles about major U.S. cities located in counties, where the first sentence focuses on the city's bordering jurisdictions. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:07, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
Hey I just moved all the counties next to straddling the border with Kansas because it seemed to fit with that geography. Made sure to put Jackson County first so people know what County it’s in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 05:09, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
If you have any question about the demographics and the past history of urban decay in Kansas City just let me know , I assume it’s confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 23:17, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
Businesses usually go to where the money is nowadays — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 23:19, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
The pages were extremely inaccurate and out of balance before , I assume you looked through all of the history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 23:29, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
Just Trying to make it fair — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 23:32, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
It takes a lot of effort to get literally half the city on the metropolitan area page because people hate Johnson County so much, honestly just trying to make it fair. Los Angeles metropolitan area page for example says it consists of LA County and Orange County And la County is more than 4 times the size of Orange County, I don’t know why it’s so hard to get half of the city in the lead. I think it’s just an emotional thing. Or the Des Moines metropolitan area for example just lists the central counties. Johnson County is literally almost the largest employment center at this point I really dont see why I have to try so hard to get it up there. It has the reputation of an economic superpower in the Kansas City area and I’ve studied the economy and demographics , people just sweep it under the carpet because they hate it. I can send you countless evidence over and over again idk what the deal is? It’s a sense of entitlement I’m just trying to make this fair, let me know if you have any questions srsly. Numbers tell the average sum of everyone’s experience and is fair. Me being originally from Missouri, I can tell you these pages were wack. It’s just an emotional thing because the city is named Kansas City and people in Missouri get really annoyed and defensive because Johnson County stole all the jobs, it’s just reality tho I’m not pushing anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 02:43, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
I’m not here to bash Missouri, I know what it seems like — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 21:33, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Look, I’m the type of person who shoves truth down people’s throats and I seem like an asshole, I just go by numbers, I was really upset because my stuff about Johnson County would get rolled back and then I got banned for using multiple accounts which I didn’t know was a thing. And then I came back and my stuff got rolled back by a “certain someone” so yeah, I’m here to be neutral and not biased but I do get angry. I’m not here to harm anything. Like I said If you disagree with anything lmk. I organize things by total employment and population.
See now I feel weird because you’re not responding and haven’t made an edit in days, so I keep writing on here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 01:45, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
He telling you I’m pushing an agenda when all I’m doing is updating the status of the area. I’m not pushing an agenda, I don’t know why I’m accused of that. Study the economy and demographics of the area. Now I’m getting paranoid :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 01:51, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Dude im a 20 year old half white half Panamanian originally From lake Lotawana who had studied demographics and economy, my dad living in AZ. It’s not a huge government conspiracy about Johnson County. You probably think I’m like the chairman of Johnson county or something and I hired a bunch of people to make fake studies about the economy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 02:04, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Now I’m just ranting because you haven’t made an edit since I told you I was moving Johnson county further up the page and I feel like you’re watching all my edits or looking for a big conspiracy online or something.
I feel like I’m walking on eggshells rn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 02:31, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
People will do anything do get Johnson County off the page, it’s entire existence is from the decay of other cities but I’m just trying to make this accurate with numbers. Everyone absolutely hates it outside of Johnson county, seriously. And I mean really really hate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 04:29, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
So are we cool😎? I came on here kinda angry when I joined because it was kinda lopsided. Trying to make these pages more accurate based off of well sourced numbers. Are we good? Seriously I’m getting paranoid. Just want to make these pages more accurate and I don’t want to piss people off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 05:31, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Ok I’ll leave you alone now just know I’m doing this in good faith, I have interest in economics and demographics. Let me know if you have any questions or how we can organize it to make it be fair if it isn’t already. Johnson has usually has almost close to double the GDP(economic output)as Jackson. It’s just one of those weird things where reality doesn’t meet the eye and no one gets it and I get frustrated because Most people don’t understand it. I know about 10 other people spreading this stuff around and some are more hostile than others, when you study the demographics it’s kinda weird but it’s the true reality.— Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 05:35, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
The problems is Johnson County had been swept under the carpet since 2005. I’m just the first person who had the numbers to show it. Seriously I don’t see why this is such a problem. People from Missouri hate it , I can show you all the numbers and just want to make it fair and we can work together if you want. Maybe I’m wrong and people just didn’t know the area and how employment worked ? I feel like they did it on purpose but IDK. I’m quitting Wikipedia right now but I’ll check back, in a week or so. But I just want these pages to be fair — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 23:01, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Like literally I’m just making this fair. I only get mad when someone denies numbers and factual encyclopedic information it’s like a sense of denial or something. Like it’s factual numbers i don’t see how that’s opinionated or POV pushing at all. With other types of things it’s different like format layout etc what goes where and fairness collaboration and working together history and culture. But with numbers , it’s the only way to make it fair , seriously. I don’t know why I have to push so hard just to get it to be fair. It annoys so many people and bothers them really tho. I’m quitting Wikipedia right now for a while , I just feel like I’m going to come back and Johnson County will be hidden in the corner again. Anyways I’ll check back in a week. I don’t see why just going by numbers is annoying people or maybe I’m just being paranoid and feel like people hate Johnson County more than they actually do. :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 23:16, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
You literally have 2 different counties on opposite sides of state lines with about equal employment in each one and equal densities. It’s like I have to bash my head against a wall to make it fair. And the one in Kansas has a much higher GDP. It’s like they want the metropolitan area page to be another KCMO page. Like I can’t make it any more clear , seriously — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 23:45, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, I was on a break from Wikipedia for two weeks, for reasons completely unrelated to you, your edits, or the article about Kansas City, Missouri. I don't have any real response to this string of posts here because I don't have opinions about these counties like you do. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:58, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
I’m paranoid then lmao sorry man, probably because I was banned before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PanamanianBlanco (talk • contribs) 06:20, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – November 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC was closed with the consensus that the resysop criteria should be made stricter.
- The follow-up RfC to develop that change is now open at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 Resysop Criteria (2).
- A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.
Arbitration
- Eligible editors may now nominate themselves as candidates for the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections. The self-nomination period will close November 12, with voting running from November 19 through December 2.
A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process
Hello!
The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.
Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.
The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.
Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 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 |
Administrators' newsletter – December 2019
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).
Administrator changes
- EvergreenFir • ToBeFree
- Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂
CheckUser changes
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC on the administrator resysop criteria was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new request for adminship is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally, Bureaucrats are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.
- Following a proposal, the edit filter mailing list has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.
Technical news
- Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry. A new page, MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry-ip, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. (T219126)
Arbitration
- Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.
Miscellaneous
- The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF
will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive
.
- The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF
Can you please check the aerticles for deletion Horrors of War, as it appears the filmmaker has removed is from the articles for deletion without the concensus of the community. The filmmaker, Peter John Ross, also had his own article removed, too. He has a history of abusing Wikipedia articles to make himself appear famous. Please assist. I am not very good at this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Metalface1981 (talk • contribs) 23:35, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – January 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment asks whether partial blocks should be enabled on the English Wikipedia. If enabled, this functionality would allow administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces, rather than the entire site.
- A proposal asks whether admins who don't use their tools for a significant period of time (e.g. five years) should have the toolset procedurally removed.
- Following a successful RfC, a whitelist is now available for users whose redirects will be autopatrolled by a bot, removing them from the new pages patrol queue. Admins can add such users to Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist after a discussion following the guidelines at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist.
Arbitration
- The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being
the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted
rather thanreasonably construed
. - Following the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Bradv, Casliber, David Fuchs, DGG, KrakatoaKatie, Maxim, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy, Worm That Turned, Xeno.
- The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being
Miscellaneous
- This issue marks three full years of the Admin newsletter. Thanks for reading!
your opinion please...
You voiced a speedy delete opinion in 2009 for nn toddler Gianna Bryant. I would have concurred. However, it is a decade later, and 13 year old Gianna Bryant appears to have become a basketball prodigy. I spent an hour or so working on User:Geo Swan/Gianna Bryant, and I think she measures up our inclusion criteria, today. I think she measured up in 2018.
If you have a moment, could you take a look at that draft?
I've called for the protection to be removed at Talk:Gianna Bryant.
Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 02:58, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- I have un-protected the Gianna Bryant page. That said, I'm not certain that she should have an article of her own. If you create a new article, it may wind up being reviewed at AfD again. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:11, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. You may be correct about a 2nd AFD.
- You are probably aware of the project to correct the wikipedia's documented unconscious bias against covering women (and girls). I think there is a similar unconscious bias against covering young people. Both of these concern me.
- I am not really a sports guy, I hope someone who is a sports person decides to pick up the ball.
- Thanks again! Geo Swan (talk) 04:07, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- I got a chance to work on the article. No one who was experienced with sports articles appeared. It was quickly nominated for deletion, as you predicted, with most people who weighed in voicing BLP1E, and ignoring the instances of other events I offered, that I thought were counter-arguments to BLP1E. Oh well.
- But I didn't come here to complain. You were very quick at removing that protection, so thank you very much for that. And you offered me your best advice, so, again, thank you very much for that.
Administrators' newsletter – February 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, partial blocks are now enabled on the English Wikipedia. This functionality allows administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces rather than the entire site. A draft policy is being workshopped at Wikipedia:Partial blocks.
- The request for comment seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure closed with
wide-spread support for an alternative desysoping procedure based on community input
. No proposed process received consensus.
Technical news
- Twinkle now supports partial blocking. There is a small checkbox that toggles the "partial" status for both blocks and templating. There is currently one template: {{uw-pblock}}.
- When trying to move a page, if the target title already exists then a warning message is shown. The warning message will now include a link to the target title. [1]
Arbitration
- Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators
that checkuser and oversight blocks must not be reversed or modified without prior consultation with the checkuser or oversighter who placed the block, the respective functionary team, or the Arbitration Committee.
- Following a recent arbitration case, the Arbitration Committee reminded administrators
Miscellaneous
- Voting in the 2020 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2020, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2020, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- The English Wikipedia has reached six million articles. Thank you everyone for your contributions!
Administrators' newsletter – March 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops
must not
undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather thanshould not
. - A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.
- Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops
Technical news
- Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.
Miscellaneous
- Following the 2020 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: BRPever, Krd, Martin Urbanec, MusikAnimal, Sakretsu, Sotiale, and Tks4Fish. There are a total of seven editors that have been appointed as stewards, the most since 2014.
- The 2020 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Ajraddatz and Uzoma Ozurumba; they will serve for one year.
Administrators' newsletter – April 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.
Technical news
- There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.
Arbitration
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a
Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment
. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a
Miscellaneous
- The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.
Disambiguation link notification for April 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited National Infrastructure Advisory Council, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jackson Municipal Airport (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- Discretionary sanctions have been authorized for all pages and edits related to COVID-19, to be logged at WP:GS/COVID19.
- Following a recent discussion on Meta-Wiki, the edit filter maintainer global group has been created.
- A request for comment has been proposed to create a new main page editor usergroup.
- A request for comment has been proposed to make the bureaucrat activity requirements more strict.
Technical news
- The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. You can review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page.
- Enterprisey created a script that will show a link to the proper Special:Undelete page when viewing a since-deleted revision, see User:Enterprisey/link-deleted-revs.
Miscellaneous
- A request for comment closed with consensus to create a Village Pump-style page for communication with the Wikimedia Foundation.
Happy First Edit Day!
Have a very happy first edit anniversary!
From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 13:34, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Invitation to join the Fifteen Year Society
Dear Metropolitan90/Archive 28,
I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Fifteen Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for fifteen years or more.
Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 15:00, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).
Administrator changes
- CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
- Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment asks whether the Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS) should allowed any unblock request or just private appeals.
- The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.
Arbitration
Administrators' newsletter – July 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is in progress to remove the T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) speedy deletion criterion.
Technical news
- Protection templates on mainspace pages are now automatically added by User:MusikBot II (BRFA).
Arbitration
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an
RfC regarding on-wiki harassment
. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community. - The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for
all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles
.
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an
some time ago
members of the Indonesian project had discussed the problem of the potential issues arising from:
According to the 2019 report by the Ministry of Home Affairs, there are 8,488 urban villages and 74,953 rural villages in Indonesia. - cheers JarrahTree 01:46, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
| | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |