B
 | I'm semi-inactive. There are more important things in life.
If you're an admin looking to ask about a block or delete I made, feel free to reverse it. If we would grant each other the presumption that we are acting in good faith, we could dispense with some of the drama and long ANI threads. Please don't use the {{talkback}} template - if you have something to say, say it. If you are asking me to review a situation, please provide links to articles and diffs to the edits in question — I cannot read your mind to figure out what you are talking about. |
| 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 120 days may be auto-archived by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 10. |
Season Greetings
edit
Merry Christmas B
Hi B, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
May next year be prosperous and joyful.
–Scopecreep Merry Xmas / Happy New Year 10.43, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
WikiProject Scouting Newsletter: May 2024
edit
Other ways to participate: |
Reminder to participate in Wikipedia research
editHello,
I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.
Take the survey here.
Kind Regards,
ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message
edit
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
B-bot is flagging an article despite the fact that it is used on an article
editGood morning sir. B-bot is tagging the image https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Logo_of_the_Group_Union_for_Europe.png&diff=prev&oldid=1274075952 despite the fact it is used on the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_for_Europe . Please wag your finger at B-bot until it stops doing it. Kind regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 23:17, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Hi @Anameofmyveryown: it looks like a different version of that image is being used on that article currently - File:Logo of the Union for Europe.svg, and so this one was (correctly) being tagged as an orphaned fair use image. I'm not sure which country the organization was legally incorporated in - Italy or France - but either way, it is probably correct that this image is not sufficiently complex to be copyrightable, and so I have edited the image description page to reflect that. This low-resolution PNG version isn't really needed - it can be moved to Commons if you want to keep it or nominated for deletion if you don't. Either way, it's probably not copyrightable, so it shouldn't be deleted as an orphaned fair use image. --B (talk) 00:36, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
Invitation to participate in research
editHello,
The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of a group of Wikipedians to better understand their experiences! We are also looking to interview some survey respondents in more detail, and you will be eligible to receive a thank-you gift for the completion of an interview. The outcomes of this research will shape future work designed to improve on-wiki experiences.
We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this survey, which shouldn’t take more than 2-3 minutes. You may view its privacy statement here. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Kind regards, Sam Walton (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Happy First Edit Day!
edit | Happy First Edit Day! Hi B! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! Worgisbor (congregate) 20:20, 22 April 2025 (UTC) |  |
Suspension of autopatrolled permission due to inactivity
edit
Hello B. Following a request for comment in May 2025, the community has decided to implement an activity requirement for the autopatrolled permission. Because your account has not edited in the last three years, the autopatrolled permission has been removed from your account. This action is purely procedural and does not affect your ability to create articles; if you return to actively creating articles, you may request that the permission be restored through the normal process. When returning, please consider taking some time to re-familiarize yourself with common practices and how they may have changed over the past few years if you wish to request the permission back. Thank you for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and we hope to see you again soon. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:19, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
Always precious
edit
Ten years ago, you were found precious. That's what you are, always. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:29, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
B-bot tagging orphaned for blocked users
editJust a suggestion that it might be a good idea to revise B-bot to not tag users who are currently blocke (or perhaps just indef block only). For example see diff and its rollback by an admin at diff. Beyond their in ability to participate, as a blocked user, it might actually encourage disruptive users to circumvent their block by inappropraite means. It is better to not poke the bear. TiggerJay (talk) 19:30, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Tiggerjay: The easiest way to block a bot from a page is to add the {{Nobots}} template to it. You can also do
{{bots|deny=B-bot}}to block B-bot in particular. (I will also skip pages with {{Deceased Wikipedian}}.) --B (talk) 20:14, 20 August 2025 (UTC)- Just curious, from a procedural / best-practice standpoint: should adding that template be done proactively or reactively to a talk page? It seems to me that it should be automatically applied (or always check by bots) to all blocked users to avoid provoking a user to consider block-avoidance behavior. But perhaps there is a reason/perspective I'm not considering? TiggerJay (talk) 20:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- I was thinking about the difficulty in programmatically ascertaining, "is this user banned and never coming back, no way, no how", are they "banned, but allowed to appeal after six months", or are they "blocked for right now, but if they ask really nicely to come back and promise to behave, they will be given a second chance". I think that yes, it would definitely make sense to add {{nobots}} as a matter of course for users who are "banned and never coming back, no way, no how" (or just protect their talk pages). For anyone else? If someone has a really strong opinion about denying this person notifications, they can add {{nobots}} to their talk page. And, of course, this is just my opinion - if the community decides at WP:BAG or after a discussion (maybe at WP:VPT) that bots should always skip over indefinitely blocked users, then we can certainly do that. --B (talk) 21:39, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- Yep, I can see the difficulty in a bot discerning what the nature of the block is and the risk of them receiving notifications. Just trying to be helpful, and thank you for the work and efforts of your bot! This is situation has probably only occurred a handful of times (to me) in the last 18 years for me, so I don't think it's a big problems, but enough to make me ask the question. Thanks again. TiggerJay (talk) 04:17, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
- I was thinking about the difficulty in programmatically ascertaining, "is this user banned and never coming back, no way, no how", are they "banned, but allowed to appeal after six months", or are they "blocked for right now, but if they ask really nicely to come back and promise to behave, they will be given a second chance". I think that yes, it would definitely make sense to add {{nobots}} as a matter of course for users who are "banned and never coming back, no way, no how" (or just protect their talk pages). For anyone else? If someone has a really strong opinion about denying this person notifications, they can add {{nobots}} to their talk page. And, of course, this is just my opinion - if the community decides at WP:BAG or after a discussion (maybe at WP:VPT) that bots should always skip over indefinitely blocked users, then we can certainly do that. --B (talk) 21:39, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- Just curious, from a procedural / best-practice standpoint: should adding that template be done proactively or reactively to a talk page? It seems to me that it should be automatically applied (or always check by bots) to all blocked users to avoid provoking a user to consider block-avoidance behavior. But perhaps there is a reason/perspective I'm not considering? TiggerJay (talk) 20:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)