|
Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac opened[edit]
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac/Evidence. Please add your evidence by January 30, 2024, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Administrator Conduct Case 2024-1: Mzajac/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 17:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2024[edit]
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).
Administrator changes
Bureaucrat changes
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.
Technical news
- Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)
Arbitration
- Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
- Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.
Miscellaneous
- Voting in the 2024 Steward elections will begin on 06 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 27 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- A vote to ratify the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found here.
- Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes. Read more
- The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in February 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with ((Unreferenced)). You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!
Faded or drifted Pigments in scanned documents.[edit]
A number of scanned works have been uploaded on Commons, including "Atlas of the Munsell Color System" (1912). This included a set of color charts. However, the colors in the chart may have faded compared to how the originals appeared. The Munusell system was analysed in the 1940's and a set of xyY data exists, which means it might be possible to recalibrate the charts. What I am asking about here (rather on the Refdesk) is whether there have been any Chemistry journal articles on which pigments (especially early 20th century ones) are likely to be subject to color drift, and potentially by how much. Coloimetric data is unlikely to exist for pre 20th century works however. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:47, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello @ShakespeareFan00: - there are a significant number of journal articles about pigment changes, the Royal Society of Chemistry have a library, from memory, of pigments and dyes. We should be able to determine the original colours by following the original recipes though, since the colour will be a function of the chemistry, and that being the case, I'd be shocked if there's not an old Munsel colour system to Pantone conversion chart somewhere. Nick (talk) 00:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. The pointer to the Royal Chemistry Society Library was all that was needed, you don't need to do anything else on this.
- There is a conversion from Munsell into xyY space, that was published in the Journal of the American Optical Society around 1940, which someone was transcribing at Wikisource.
- By comparison of the expected RGB triplets from conversion of those xyY values, ( possibly allowing for a change of illuminant), it should also be possible to compare the drift in the scan against known standards. Other considerations include potential concerns about gamut conversion truncations ( sRGB doesn't cover all 'print' colors for example.)
- Atlas of the Munsell Color System: co:File:Atlas of the Munsell color system.djvu
- A tristimulus specfication of this appears to have been published as : Tyler & Hardy, (1940) "Analysis of the Original Munsell Color System" in Journal of the Optical Society of America v. 30 iss. 12, pp.587-590.
- Obviously, if I go further, I'll need to do a fuller literature review, so thanks for the appreciated pointers given :) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:26, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
- @ShakespeareFan00: if you're needing any literature on this that isn't digitised and online, or which isn't available through any of the Wikipedia Library avenues, you can see if the Queen's University Belfast library has a print copy https://www.qub.ac.uk/lib/ and I'll get one of our librarians to scan it for me - likewise for anything on the Royal Society of Chemistry side, I can request material from them if needed. Nick (talk) 08:45, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2024[edit]
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2024).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Phase I of the 2024 RfA review is now open for participation. Editors are invited to review, comment on, and propose improvements to the requests for adminship process.
- Following an RfC, the inactivity requirement for the removal of the interface administrator right increased from 6 months to 12 months.
Technical news
- The mobile site history pages now use the same HTML as the desktop history pages. (T353388)
Miscellaneous
- The 2024 appointees for the Ombuds commission are だ＊ぜ, AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Doǵu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, MdsShakil, Minorax, Nehaoua, Renvoy and RoySmith as members, with Vermont serving as steward-observer.
- Following the 2024 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Ajraddatz, Albertoleoncio, EPIC, JJMC89, Johannnes89, Melos and Yahya.
Administrators' newsletter – April 2024[edit]
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).
Administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC is open to convert all current and future community discretionary sanctions to (community designated) contentious topics procedure.
Technical news
- The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)
Arbitration
- An arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".
Miscellaneous
- Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.
Administrators' newsletter – May 2024[edit]
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2024).
Guideline and policy news
- Phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship review has concluded. Several proposals have passed outright and will proceed to implementation, including creating a discussion-only period (3b) and administrator elections (13) on a trial basis. Other successful proposals, such as creating a reminder of civility norms (2), will undergo further refinement in Phase II. Proposals passed on a trial basis will be discussed in Phase II, after their trials conclude. Further details on specific proposals can be found in the full report.
Technical news
- Partial action blocks are now in effect on the English Wikipedia. This means that administrators have the ability to restrict users from certain actions, including uploading files, moving pages and files, creating new pages, and sending thanks. T280531
Arbitration
- The arbitration case Conflict of interest management has been closed.
Miscellaneous
- This may be a good time to reach out to potential nominees to ask if they would consider an RfA.
- A New Pages Patrol backlog drive is happening in May 2024 to reduce the number of unreviewed articles in the new pages feed. Currently, there is a backlog of over 15,000 articles awaiting review. Sign up here to participate!
- Voting for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election is open until 9 May 2024. Read the voting page on Meta-Wiki and cast your vote here!
Administrators' newsletter – June 2024[edit]
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2024).
Administrator changes
Bureaucrat changes
Guideline and policy news
- Phase II of the 2024 RfA review has commenced to improve and refine the proposals passed in Phase I.
Technical news
- The Nuke feature, which enables administrators to mass delete pages, will now correctly delete pages which were moved to another title. T43351
Arbitration
- The arbitration case Venezuelan politics has been closed.
- The Committee is seeking volunteers for various roles, including access to the conflict of interest VRT queue.
Miscellaneous
- WikiProject Reliability's unsourced statements drive is happening in June 2024 to replace ((citation needed)) tags with references! Sign up here to participate!
Tfm notice on Template:If both[edit]
Could you consider using ((subst:tfm|help=off|type=disabled|1=Both)) instead of removing the whole notice? Per the TfD process, the notice should stay there. Nickps (talk) 11:51, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Nickps: is that going to break the template again, as per the last notice you asked be placed there ? Nick (talk) 11:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- It shouldn't, considering that, per the documentation, it outputs nothing at all on transclusions. Nickps (talk) 11:55, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Also, more out of curiosity than anything, how did the template break? Nickps (talk) 11:58, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- It was causing any infobox with the ((Marriage)) template to throw up the following error <div style="display:inline-block;Expression error: Unexpected < operator">. The alternative TfD does look to be working correctly now (having purged and checked with pages showing the error previously). Nick (talk) 12:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Nickps: I'm a bit worried that you're more concerned about the TfD template than the functionality the If both template is providing and can't provide a suitable reassurance your requested edits aren't going to break the template. Again. In any case, we will give it a go and see what we can do. The TfD template doesn't really need to be there now, does it, likely nobody will comment at the TfD and it'll be closed as merge in a week anyway, as it's an uncontoversial merger. Nick (talk) 12:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- Let me phrase it better then. I'm 100% confident that using <noinclude></noinclude> will result in absolutely no breakage. There's your suitable reassurance. I don't agree that the template doesn't need to be there since people may contest the close by arguing they didn't know about the TfD. Nickps (talk) 12:05, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Nickps: I'm a bit worried that you're more concerned about the TfD template than the functionality the If both template is providing and can't provide a suitable reassurance your requested edits aren't going to break the template. Again. In any case, we will give it a go and see what we can do. The TfD template doesn't really need to be there now, does it, likely nobody will comment at the TfD and it'll be closed as merge in a week anyway, as it's an uncontoversial merger. Nick (talk) 12:01, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- It was causing any infobox with the ((Marriage)) template to throw up the following error <div style="display:inline-block;Expression error: Unexpected < operator">. The alternative TfD does look to be working correctly now (having purged and checked with pages showing the error previously). Nick (talk) 12:12, 8 June 2024 (UTC)