User talk:Donald Trung/Archive 14

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Tech News: 2018-10

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

  • You can now make longer edit summaries. [1]

Changes later this week

  • You can notify users in edit summaries. They will get a ping just as if they had been mentioned on a wiki page. [2]
  • On Special:AbuseLog you can now choose to list only actions that actually made an edit. Other actions are when the filter warned the editor or blocked the edit from being made. There are also more search options. [3][4]
  • Advanced item Wikis can enable Citoid to provide automatic reference look-up in the visual editor and the 2017 wikitext editor, but it is complex. The tool will now warn in the JavaScript console if the configuration isn't correct. Soon Citoid will disable itself if the configuration isn't correct. Check that your wiki is configured correctly. You can ask for help if you need it. [5]
  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 6 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 7 March. It will be on all wikis from 8 March (calendar).

Meetings

  • Recurrent item You can join the next meeting with the Editing team. During the meeting, you can tell developers which bugs you think are the most important. The meeting will be on 6 March at 19:30 (UTC). See how to join.
  • Advanced item You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 7 March at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

17:12, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Break (notice)

As I just saw that I'm in the top 1000 of the most active users on a site of many millions I have decided to take a break for the next few weeks. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 01:27, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

An apology from Trung

I am copying this thread to say that I should have assumed good faith from Beetstra and that I shouldn't have hold a grudge against him, I see now that he assumed that I was a spammer because of my behaviour and that he sees no reason for it to be blacklisted, I shouldn't have held this accusation against him after this and only restore it here as I wish to link this on my user page that I hold no grudge against Beetstra. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 06:56, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Thread :

Line 466: Line 466:  

 

  I'll be honest, I only appealed my global lock because of two specific reasons, Beetstra falsely accused me of being a spammer, and this edit which reverted content additions (against both global and local policies). If Beetstra never accused me of being a spammer I would've still been locked now and not appealed it, but it's the culture on all Wikimedia projects that educational content should be removed because of the author that bothers me, and honestly I feel really bad that the articles you created were speedy deleted rather than going through a regular request for deletion because I’m pretty sure that if “Banned contributor” would be the only given reason that very little content would actually be deleted solely on that basis alone, you have people who are here to build an encyclopedia, and you have people that are only here to revert and delete while rarely actually caring about content, and the latter group is exactly what's wrong here. Don't mention what wrongs they locally make on that local project because they would still call it “importing problems from other projects” either because the lack the capabilities to logically assess the situation, or because “assume bad faith” is simply the norm (though it's probably a combination of both). Just try joining Simple English Wikipedia, and make some content there, if you’re lucky some uninvolved editor will bring them to English Wikipedia too. --Donald Trung (Talk 🤳🏻) (My global lock 🔒) (My global unlock 🔓) 12:40, 17 December 2017 (UTC)   I'll be honest, I only appealed my global lock because of two specific reasons, Beetstra falsely accused me of being a spammer, and this edit which reverted content additions (against both global and local policies). If Beetstra never accused me of being a spammer I would've still been locked now and not appealed it, but it's the culture on all Wikimedia projects that educational content should be removed because of the author that bothers me, and honestly I feel really bad that the articles you created were speedy deleted rather than going through a regular request for deletion because I’m pretty sure that if “Banned contributor” would be the only given reason that very little content would actually be deleted solely on that basis alone, you have people who are here to build an encyclopedia, and you have people that are only here to revert and delete while rarely actually caring about content, and the latter group is exactly what's wrong here. Don't mention what wrongs they locally make on that local project because they would still call it “importing problems from other projects” either because the lack the capabilities to logically assess the situation, or because “assume bad faith” is simply the norm (though it's probably a combination of both). Just try joining Simple English Wikipedia, and make some content there, if you’re lucky some uninvolved editor will bring them to English Wikipedia too. --Donald Trung (Talk 🤳🏻) (My global lock 🔒) (My global unlock 🔓) 12:40, 17 December 2017 (UTC) −

  −

beetra has an idiosyncratic view of spam, but he does have some admin support. he is biting a generation of new users, rather than welcoming them, and improving their links. he is a symptom of a broken culture. you noticed that they have a summary process that harms the wiki. even worse you have an editor, who deletes 18000 articles after 30 days, because 1000 of them need some reference cleanup. we see a recent deletion wave to enforce moves of denied AfC reviews. and here are the reputation consequences [6]; [7] there is a blocked editor at simple, but i prefer the community at wikisource. my unsatisfactory solution is "recruit 500 editors to vote at arbcom and impose civility code of conduct". we will see. Slowking4 (talk) 13:39, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

  −

  − Slowking4: I am again going to suggest to you to get your main account unblocked. I would support that (under standard conditions).   −

  − @Donald Trung: I have not accused you of spamming - If links are blacklisted it is normal to remove them. As you were creating socks and this link was deemed inappropriate, it apparently got blacklisted (I actually can't find that discussion back, it actually may not have been blacklisted as all your accounts were at that time globally locked and we may have wanted to wait out the results of that), as, obvious, blocking one sock would just have resulted in you creating another sock and continuing your edits.   −

  − That type of behaviour results in links getting blacklisted (even sometimes good ones), that behaviour results in accounts getting blocked or even (globally) locked (as I do with Slowking4's continuous socks - and they knows that I am filtering their IP edits where possible while editing on IPs), that behaviour results in your additions to be wiped from the face of Wikipedia (see en:WP:RBI/en:WP:DENY). Now, if you finally drop this stick and back off from this dead horse and continue to normal editing (as I have suggested repeatedly to Slowking4), then we can all continue with regular editing instead of digging deeper and deeper holes.   −

  − Both of you are losing the patience of members of the community. You both are good editors, but this is simply not constructive in any form. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 07:23, 18 December 2017 (UTC)   −

  −

[citation needed] i do not believe a word you say, including and, and the. the admin corps' incivility has lost the patience of world-class librarians. [8]. they are my peer group, not you. Slowking4 (talk) 13:30, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

  −

  −

You are your own citation, Slowking4, so that is covered.

  −

I am looking at the references however for the tweet/twitter-discussion you mention. I mean, if anybody's curious why not one millisecond of my time, penny of my money, or penny's-worth of my labor goes to Wikipedia...

... this is it, basically.

Don't @ me I can fix it. That's BS. Its system militates against fixing itself. (quoting https://twitter.com/LibSkrat/status/942136008551944192). Re-tweet of a post of 13 December on the 16. What this person missed was that history was already rewritten at that time, and it fails to acknowledge what happened at at that time. If that is how librarians do history.

  −

Anyway, keep socking, and you will never know whether anything I say can be believed or not. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 15:10, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

  −

you are your own parody: more word salad, when i suggest citations. i do not recall any suggestions from you, rather all i see are reversions, with snarky edit summaries. keep it up, and when the librarians take over, you will be code of conduct "victim". Slowking4 (talk) 15:19, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

  −

Yes, and you are doing good suggestions! When have I ever complained about the quality of your work? All I suggest to you is to return to your main account on en.wikipedia and stop socking. Anyway, back to my books. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 15:27, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

  −

since you are into censoring calling out your ignorance, i will leave this here-

  −

I know that it is not going to happen .. Jimmy Wales sending me 1 million dollar is not going to happen either. I will just have to live with it. And if I have the choice between checking with Google to see whether WikiData is correct, and if it is not using Google to get the correct data, or skip WikiData and just get the correct data from Google directly, then I choose the latter option. WikiData has its place in this world, but no place on en.wikipedia.

  −

this is hilarious. you realize that knowledge graph uses wikidata, google having abandoned their knowledge database in favor of it? [9] have you tried a grant request? what would you spend it on, other than "send me money"? wikidata on the other hand, has no funding problems. [10]

  −

It is not censoring, it is wiping anything you say from the face of en.wikipedia, per the block policy. Get your main account unblocked, or stay away. —Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 04:13, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  −

  −

except you have not wiped it all away, as noticed by multiple editors. your deny essay tends to undermine your credibility and authority. it is built upon flawed vindictive projection. sorry, i do not take orders from proven ignorant people. Slowking4 (talk) 12:16, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  −

Again, no credibility. I hope you understood that you just did your umptieth copyright violation. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 13:29, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  −

fair use is not a copyright violation. “Fair use is not just excused by the law, it is wholly authorized by the law.” [11], [12] i hope you understand by your biting even librarians, that you are a net negative to the website. Slowking4 (talk) 13:57, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  −

Yes, fair use is not a copyright violation, but a wholesale copy is not fair use, it is a copyright violation, and that is what you just did (again). —Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 17:12, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

  

Commons - Design feedback request: Multilingual Captions

Revision as of 23:37, 15 February 2018

--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 06:56, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: February 2018



Headlines
Read this edition in full • Single-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

About This Month in GLAM · Subscribe/Unsubscribe · Global message delivery · Romaine 16:06, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Category:Coins of Vietnam by inscription (To-do list 📃)

This list is temporarily placed here so I can work on the red-links.

Nguyễn Dynasty

  1. Category:Gia Long Thông Bảo ✓ Done
  2. Category:Minh Mạng Thông Bảo ✓ Done
  3. Category:Thiệu Trị Thông Bảo ✓ Done
  4. Category:Tự Đức Thông Bảo ✓ Done
  5. Category:Tự Đức Bảo Sao ✓ Done
  6. Category:Thành Thái Thông Bảo ✓ Done
  7. Category:Khải Định Thông Bảo ✓ Done
  8. Category:Bảo Đại Thông Bảo ✓ Done

Category:Coins of Vietnam by inscription Category:Coins of the Nguyễn dynasty

Sent 📩 from my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL with Microsoft Windows 10 Mobile 📱. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:50, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Cảnh Hưng XXXX Bảo

  1. Category:Cảnh Hưng coins ✓ Done

Category:Coins of Vietnam by inscription Category:Coins of the Later Lê dynasty

Sent 📩 from my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL with Microsoft Windows 10 Mobile 📱. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:50, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Images to check

@Ruthven: I've recently uploaded a whole batch of images from Art-Hanoi, I'm not sure how the OTRS works so I don't know if you're the only one that can respond to this ticket 🎟 or others, but in my recent uploads and/or the category Category:Media contributed by Art Hanoi there's a new batch of images that don't have the right OTRS ticket 🎟 associated with them. If I can request any OTRS agent about this ticket 🎟 or if these things usually get checked out by themselves (that OTRS volunteers don't need to be notified) then please tell me. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 14:50, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done It's easier to ask me, because I dealt with the ticket. If you want to ask to someone else, remember to specify the ticket number. Cheers --Ruthven (msg) 21:39, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Message regarding the ArbCom

On March 8th, 2018 I had sent this message,

“Dear Worm That Turned,

Currently my e-mail address is blocked by the ArbCom mailing list and the former Arbiter Drmies had to send an appeal to the list prior, the reason for that was because I had sent to many e-mails, I kindly request of you that you would unblacklist my e-mail address from the ArbCom mailing list if I ever wish to appeal to the ArbCom.

Yours faithfully, Donald Trung Quoc Don.”

I am only sharing this message for transparency.

Sent 📩 from my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL with Microsoft Windows 10 Mobile 📱. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 01:08, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

E-mail to Dlorichiekim

This is completely unrelated to my previous e-mail.

Do you think that if you can close the discussion now as I have more votes that support unblock and I fully understand that ANY breach will lead to a full ban that it could work? I am not trying to circumvent consensus here, the discussion hasn't had a reply in almost a day and the last few seem positive with most opposes concerning my (regrettable) behaviour at Meta, I am simply afraid that if I get banned here that this will lead to a global ban which will also make me lose access at Wikimedia Commons and the Dutch Wikipedia, also my blocklogs at both of those sites are clean, I made a mistake to change my signature and thought that templates weren't considered emoji's (as part of my unblock conditions), I fully understand what I did wrong and know that there would be no coming back from trying to find loopholes.

I've been very anxious these past couple of days and don't want to get fully globally banned over disruptive voting on one wiki and emoji's on another (I know of the other issues and simply want to edit content-only), I honestly didn't know that my previous unblock was a complete last chance to some and I've never had a block shorter than indefinite (not that it excuses my behaviour, but I always adapt my behaviour after warnings). As of now there are a few more unblock voted than block votes so an unblock wouldn't be controversial. I am not trying to game the system, I just want a chance to prove that I care about the readers and the knowledge contained in Wikipedia.

-- This email was sent by user "Donald Trung" on the English Wikipedia to user "Dlohcierekim". It has been automatically delivered and the Wikimedia Foundation cannot be held responsible for its contents.

The sender has not been given the recipient's email address, nor any information about his/her email account; and the recipient has no obligation to reply to this email or take any other action that might disclose his/her identity. If you respond, the sender will know your email address. For further information on privacy, security, and replying, as well as abuse and removal from emailing, see <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Email>.

Sent 📩 from my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL with Microsoft Windows 10 Mobile 📱. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 01:08, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

E-mail to [redacted]

Geloof mij, ik snap dat jij je niet met zaken op de en-wiki wil bemoeien en momenteel zijn er meer stemmen in mijn voordeel, maar als ik voor een onbepaalde tijd op twee wiki's ben geblokkeerd volgt er direct een verzoek om commentaar voor een globale verbanning, een aantal gebruikers hebben dat al verzocht.

De bewering dat ik verstorend gedrag vertoon op de en-wiki is absurd, ik had (1) een compliment gegeven aan Sander van Ginkel vanwege een aantal artikelen die The Banner onterecht had genomineerd voor verwijdering, dat hij later verbannen zou worden vanwege andere (wel slechte artikelen) had ik niet kunnen weten, (2) ik begon een verzoek om commentaar om te vragen of ik emoji's mocht gebruiken, een moderator zij dat ik dat wel mocht en de consensus was alleen tegen het feit dat andere vonden dat emoji's smakeloos waren, (3) ik stemde tegen een voorstel dat gebruikers die een blokkade voor de tweede keer ontduiken permanent verbannen moeten worden en citeerde gebruikers zoals Slowking4 die alleen maar de encyclopedie verbeterde als reden waarom dit een slecht idee was, toen werd ik geblokkeerd omdat sjablonen zie gelijkwaardig aan emoji's waren werden aangezien als emoji's en was dit een directe reden voor een blokkade voor een onbepaalde tijd (ongeveer een kwart van de moderators op en-wiki hebben emoji's in hun handtekening dus dat het als "mishandeling" wordt gezien heeft alleen op mij van toepassing), een direct gevolg was dat een checkuser een account van jaren terug dat met mijn echte naam en dat van mijn oudste zoon geassocieerd kan worden gewoon openbaar heeft gemaakt (ook met de valse bewering dat ik ooit jaren geleden sokpopmisbruik heb gepleegd). Verschillende gebruikers zoals TonyBalloni gaven toe dat zij direct een globale verbanning voor mij willen aanvragen (niet gebaseerd op mijn lokaal gedrag maar op Meta) en een aantal stemmers zoals Steinsplitter hebben bijna geen bijdragen om de en-wiki.

Ik vraag dit niet omdat ik alleen bang ben om op de en-wiki te bewerken, het directe gevolg is dat zij mij globaal gaan verbannen dus ook van Wikimedia Commons waar ik in de top duizend van meest actieve gebruikers ben en één van de meest actieve uploaders, en de nl-wiki waar ik nog nooit lokaal ben geblokkeerd. Het liefst schrijf ik deze dingen niet off-wiki maar ik had het naïve idee dat kritiek op beleiden openbaarlijk on-wiki besproken konden worden en dat niemand immuun was voor kritiek, ik geef toe dat ik bij de stewardverkiezingen niet op iedereen nee had moeten stemmen en gewoon een verzoek om commentaar had moeten openen om er voor te zorgen dat beleiden daadwerkelijk ernaar geleefd worden, maar een blokkade om een handtekening dat alleen maar schadelose sjablonen gebruikte wat mij van alle projecten af getrapt kan laten worden hoort geen plaats in geen enkele gemeenschap te hebben.

Ik wil je hier echt niet mee storen en bemoei mij al tijden niet meer met wat de meeste moderators aandenken alleen hun en niet de rest van de gemeenschap aangaat, jij was zelf vroeger moderator, zou jij het normaal vinden om iemand van de nl-wiki af te trappen omdat zij een "verkeerde" handtekening hadden?

Tenzij jij hier op reageert met een verzoek om meer informatie is dit mijn laatste e-mail over dit onderwerp.

Hoogachtend,
Donald

--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 01:08, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Als je met dingen uit mijn verleden die twee oudere accounts bedoeld is daar nooit sokpopmisbruik mee gepleegd, sterker nog de ArbCom wist ervan en die accounts mochten voorheen niet met mijn huidige worden geassocieerd vanwege privacy redenen ([redacted]), de bewering dat ik ooit sokpopmisbruik heb gepleegd voor 2017 slaat nergens op, natuurlijk wist de betreffende moderator dat ik niet openbaarlijk commentaar op die accounts ging geven en zijn zij duidelijk irrelevant in een gesprek over een handtekening, dit was een duidelijke zet om mij te outen ([redacted]), [redacted] en dat dit volledig in de WP:CLEANSTART beleid viel (ik was nooit eerder een blokkade of sanctie opgelegd in de tien jaar dat ik hier bewerk, ik koos een nieuw account voor privacy redenen en wordt daarom gekruisigd), natuurlijk de Oversighter die dat soort dingen normaliter direct hoort te verwijderen is de moderator die mij geblokkeerd heeft.

Stel je voor dat iemand tegen jou zou zeggen "Als je je handtekening veranderd in iets wat niet tegen de regels [redacted]" ongeacht of ik gedeblokkeerd wordt of niet moet ik dit gaan rapporteren aan de ombudsmancomissie. Dezelfde persoon die beweerde dat ik al jaren aan sokpopmisbruik deed beweerde ook dat ik een betaalde bewerker was tijdens mijn blokkade en had een educatieve website op de zwarte lijst gezet. Ironisch genoeg nu ik in Hanoi ben wou ik eigenlijk Wikipedia een aantal weken achter mij laten maar omdat ik één commentaar had gegeven op een slecht beleidsvoorstel wordt ik nu zo behandeld. Ik heb nog nooit een blokkade korter dan een onbepaalde tijd gekregen, en de deblokkade conditie had nooit iets met mijn blokkade te maken, het was de persoonlijke smaak van de desbetreffende moderator en zelfs een klein overtreding was in zijn ogen het verspillen van een laatste kans.

Ik had in de paar weken dat ik actief was honderden bewerking in de artikelruimte gedaan of gerelateerd aan het schrijven van artikels, en minder dan 10 daar niet aan gerelateerd en die vielen allemaal binnen de regels en richtlijnen voor gebruikers, de enige reden waarom ik vroeg wanneer ik van mijn sancties af kon komen is omdat gebruikers met sancties gestalkt worden voor elke kleine overtreding door mensen die vaak maar weinig (of zelfs geen) inhoudelijke bewerkingen doen, dat zijn de mensen die van mijn part een nieuwe hobby moeten gaan zoeken, niet zij die de lezers altijd eerst zetten.

--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 01:08, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Sent 📩 from my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL with Microsoft Windows 10 Mobile 📱. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 01:08, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Message to "Cyberpower678"

be able to be online in quite a few days.

Just to make it clear I fully accept the condition where I may also not reply to any conversation where I'm invited if it is in a space where I'm not allowed to edit. If you look at the AN/I there are currently slightly more votes in my favour and I fully understand that this is my FINAL chance, I just wish to improve articles again and have already drafted a few articles that I would like to publish.

-- This email was sent by user "Donald Trung" on the English Wikipedia to user "Cyberpower678". It has been automatically delivered and the Wikimedia Foundation cannot be held responsible for its contents.

The sender has not been given the recipient's email address, nor any information about his/her email account; and the recipient has no obligation to reply to this email or take any other action that might disclose his/her identity. If you respond, the sender will know your email address. For further information on privacy, security, and replying, as well as abuse and removal from emailing, see <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Email>.

Sent 📩 from my Microsoft Lumia 950 XL with Microsoft Windows 10 Mobile 📱. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (Talk 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 01:08, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #303

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Development
    • Significantly (on average to 1/4th) reduced the number of changes from Wikidata showing up on the watchlists and recent changes on Wikipedias and the other sister projects. This way changes that do not affect an article should no longer show up. We're still holding off roll-out to Commons, Cebuano, Waray-Waray and Armenian Wikipedia because of scalability concerns.
    • Working on optimizing one of the largest database tables (wb_terms) (phab:T188279)
    • Fixing a bug on how Wikidata changes are shown on Wikipedia (phab:T189320)
    • Continued addressing security review issues for Wikibase-Lexeme extension (phab:T186726)

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.


Final note from Léa: thanks to people who participated to the feedback page! Today's Weekly Summary is already improved thanks to your suggestions. Feel free to add more comments, and feel free to edit the newsletter yourself: all small contributions are welcome :)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Donald_Trung/Archive_14&oldid=292137999"