This user is an administrator, oversighter and checkuser.
This user has a bot (inactive)
Email this user.

User talk:Billinghurst

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search



Je suis Charlie
"Da mihi basium"
User language
en-N This user has a native understanding of English.
fr-1 Cet utilisateur dispose de connaissances de base en français.
Users by language
To leave me a message, click this link


Article[edit]

Wikipedia article on St. Joseph's school, Darjeeling reads like an advert, usage of over the top grandiloquent language. Revise is necessary.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 155.94.198.249 (talk) 06:52, 31 July 2015‎

I am not sure which language wiki to which you are referring, though please feel free to edit it to make it suitable for that wiki.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:40, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #169[edit]

Major foulup regarding socks on ENWP[edit]

I know that this particular site is not well liked among some people on the projects and for good reason but every once in a while they do hit the nail on the head. This topic outlines precisely why we should be skeptical of decisions on Wikipedia from Checkusers who base their decisions not on evidence but solely on their "experience" and gut instincts when there is no actual proof. This topic is particularly striking given the recent discussion about EChastain who was also banned on ENWP and accused not once but twice of being a sock of a banned editor and then had that ban extended to commons. Aside from that, given that you spoke up on the EChastain issue, I thought you would be interested in seeing this incident on ENWP. It also helps to clarify why I am so untrusting of the admins and checkuser's non data based decisions. Reguyla (talk) 17:17, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

@Reguyla: We have systems and review, and people operating in public view. A mistake was made and being rectified, with acknowledgement … I think that what happens at enWP is sometimes less than perfect (users/admins/checkusers/arbcom), however, in the combative environment where people avoid blocks, and we have suspicions, accusations, and demands for actions, that sometimes these things will happen. I am more impressed that mistakes were admitted and rectified and hopefully lessons learnt.

I keep myself well outside of the politics of that place, and out of "MyShitDdoesntStink"ocracy, I have a preference to edit and achieve, not to piss around on the games that some wish to play, that isn't why I am here … I will give all people a fair chance, but I hope that they don't expect two or more fair chances. <shrug>  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:18, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree, that's really not why I edit either I just see how lousy of a job some do as admins on ENWP and are allowed to manipulate the system and cause the editing environment to be so bad through their bullying and abusive behavior and I feel compelled to do something. Since I wasn't an admin when doing it, I was perceived as a threat and banned. If the processes for dealing with the admin abuse and bullying editors was better then I wouldn't have been banned and a whole lot more people would be editing that project still that have been run off. So I disagree with your sentiments somewhat that there are working processes there. Sure sometimes they get one right, but before they do, as can be seen by the case in point, a lot goes wrong first. I bring that case up because I feel that the EChastain failure was very similar in nature. It was never actually proven that EChastain was Matisse (it may be but there was no proof). It was a couple admins guessing and obviously their guesses aren't always right. I find it absurd that Commons would block an editor with 50, 000 edits based on an decision from ENWP that was done without any proof. I am even more appalled that so many admins and editors on commons simply lined up to agree without even bothering to look at any of the details or evidence of the case. And we wonder why people don't like editing the WMF projects? That is why! Reguyla (talk) 21:18, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
@Reguyla:, outside of emergency actions, I find it unusual that a person with 50k edits can be blocked by one admin without any due process, as that sits roughly with my principles around natural justice and a 'fair go'. So philosophically you will not find me in disagreement, without touching on the specifics of any case. To me the opinion of the community should always be predominant, and be sought, whether it aligns with my own point of view or not. Justice needs to be seen to be done to be accepted, and barring exceptional circumstances, it should be the demonstrated norm. In the end all advanced rights holders only represent the community, and only have rights to do something, it is an election to role of leadership, not an election of a leader. Anyway, my 20c viewpoint is possibly of little value, compared with how I try to implement my beliefs of a 'fair go'.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:23, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
I understand and it certainly appeared as though you were not in the ban them without evidence camp either. Unfortunately, the reason why many of the projects are in the state that they are, which is that a few very vocal and abusive admins rule over all, is because no one is willing to stand up to them and those that do are banned like I was to silence their dissent and win the disagreement. MY fear is that until the WMF starts to step in and reign in some of those problematic individuals with the same enthusiasm they have for usurping the community in other ways, the problems are only going to get worse. Anyway, no need to beat a deceased equine, the damage has already been done. Reguyla (talk) 17:45, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
A steward was elected to the WMF board, so why not chat to him about positive solutions.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:07, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
May I ask who that was? I'm not really in the know on who is on the board. Reguyla (talk) 15:42, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Read the edit summary, I just didn't want to ping.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:59, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Oh ok thanks, didnt see that. Reguyla (talk) 16:02, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

block[edit]

hmm, so the fact that the timeframe is same, and the new block is for unlogged only does not resolve this? I've assumed it would... Pundit (talk) 12:50, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

@Pundit: nope, they both apply, and yours is the softer, so will fail. :-(  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:18, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
The wider block was rendering some bots inoperational though... Pundit (talk) 06:29, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
@Pundit: I wasn't commenting on the purpose of the wider block, I was just saying that it was still in place, so still in effect, and therefore overriding and nullifying your smaller, lighter block.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:03, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Ah, sorry, I misunderstood you. @Masti: - can can you comment on how are your bots behaving now? Pundit (talk) 16:15, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Bots are working OK only forcing to relog again once. But no problems now @Pundit: masti <dyskusja> 14:17, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

SBL handler?[edit]

Not working for me today - am I the only one? Cheers --Herby talk thyme 11:54, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

@Herbythyme: Mediawiki update! I have updated the gadgets to all be ResourceLoader and SBL seems to be working.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:11, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Yep - working again - appreciated :) --Herby talk thyme 12:39, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

Dear Billinghurst, please look this. --Vadgt (talk) 12:33, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

please again look the page. --Vadgt (talk) 13:09, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #170[edit]

One question[edit]

Dear Mardetanha, I have a question: can be such a thing, that in other project, for example Armenian Wikibooks, admin elects without voting, for "clean up" this project. --Vadgt (talk) 14:33, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

@Mardetanha: ^^^  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:43, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Archive[edit]

Could you archive this page?. I dont know how to do it. Thanks in advance. --LadyInGrey (talk) 01:21, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

global (meta) user page[edit]

Is it possible to opt-out of this global userpage nonsense? What would happen if, say, my Meta user page were deleted? ~ DanielTom (talk) 11:04, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

At a local wiki if you do not have a local user page, then your meta page will be transcluded. So just <noinclude> your meta page, or portions of it, if you want to keep your meta page but not have it xwiki.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:12, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. ~ DanielTom (talk) 11:35, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

When you are bored...[edit]

Run the link search on the top 40 wikis from my latest COI bot/poke will you (peakware.com)... I'd appreciate your opinion. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 13:57, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

There is a citation template on en.wp that is legit. MER-C (talk) 04:05, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi[edit]

Dear Billinghurst, please look this. --Vadgt (talk) 12:26, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #171[edit]

Consulta[edit]

Necesito saber el autor del texto publicado en este enlace https://es.wikisource.org/wiki/P%C3%A1gina:Lopez_La_seniorita_Raquel.djvu/141 Podras ayudarme?

I have moved the question to s:es:Wikisource:Café#Consulta  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:38, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Updated scripts[edit]

Hi Billinghurst. I edited your global.js to update you to the latest version of TemplateScript. The main change you'll notice is that writing scripts is much easier thanks to a context argument passed in by TemplateScript, which encapsulates a pile of common actions. Let me know if anything breaks. :) —Pathoschild 02:59, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #172[edit]

Bagdes II[edit]

Please delete unused csb:Szablóna:Lënk FA. I tried to add a tag but "speedy" does not seem to be a valid template. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:51, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:37, 24 August 2015 (UTC)