Jump to content

User talk:fanfanboy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject Users (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis editor is within the scope of WikiProject Users, a collaborative effort to rate Wikipedia editors to assess the value of their contributions to the encyclopedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can contest your rating and see a list of open tasks.[Humor]
 Start  This user has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This user has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Archives (Index)
This page is archived by ClueBot III.

The Signpost: 26 September 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:08, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RFA2024 update: Discussion-only period now open for review

[edit]

Hi there! The trial of the RfA discussion-only period passed at WP:RFA2024 has concluded, and after open discussion, the RfC is now considering whether to retain, modify, or discontinue it. You are invited to participate at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase II/Discussion-only period. Cheers, and happy editing! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections: Call for Candidates

[edit]

Administrator Elections | Call for Candidates

The administrator elections process has officially started! Interested editors are encouraged to self-nominate or arrange to be nominated by reviewing the instructions at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Call for candidates.

Here is the schedule:

  • October 8–14 - Candidate sign-up (we are here)
  • October 22–24 - Discussion phase
  • October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase

Please note the following:

  • The requirements to run are identical to RFA—a prospective candidate must be extended confirmed.
  • Prospective candidates are advised to become familar with the community's expectations of adminstrators, which are much higher than the minimum requirement of having extended confirmed status. This includes reviewing successful and unsuccessful RFAs, reading the essay Wikipedia:Advice for RfA candidates, and possibly requesting an optional poll on their chances of passing.
  • The process will have a one week call for candidates phase, a one week pause to set up SecurePoll, a three-day period of public discussion, followed by 7 days of no public discussion and a private vote using SecurePoll.
  • The outcomes of this process are identical to making requests for adminship. There is no official difference between an administrator appointed through RFA or administrator elections.
  • Administrator elections are also a valid means of regaining adminship for de-sysopped editors.

Ask any questions about the process at the talk page. A separate user talk message will be sent to official candidates with additional information about the process.

To avoid sending too many messages, this will be the last mass message sent about administrator elections. If you are interested in the process, please make sure to watchlist the appropriate pages. A watchlist notice will be added when the discussion phase opens, and again when the voting phase opens.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:35, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

[edit]

Looking at your signature, there seems to be an empty {{#if:|...}} statement (no test string is provided). I was wondering if you are using a template in your signature? Note as per Wikipedia:Signatures § Guidelines and policies, transcluded templates and parser functions shouldn't be used in your signature. It adds processing cost and the added variability doesn't work well with page caching. Can you consider removing the parser function call or any templates from your signature in order to comply? I would appreciate your cooperation! isaacl (talk) 17:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at my signature, and yes it seems I did have a template. I have fixed that and now it should be good. fanfanboy (block) 18:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A few more comments
  • The contrast between the dark blue and black is not sufficient to meet accessibility criteria.
  • Consider not using a highlighter, as it can make your signature stand out a bit too much
  • The "block" link is an Wikipedia:EGG, which means new editors won't understand how to communicate with you, and might make admins scared of accidentily blocking you.
—Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:48, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you mean by highlighter, but is this an acceptable signature? fanfanboy (block talk) 18:47, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the contrast is just about okay now, thanks!. With the highlighting, I mean the black background. It's not a must, but some people believe it's not great as it may distract from the discussion (Wikipedia:HIGHLIGHTSIG). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:31, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While the contrast ratio just meets the WCAG AA standards for normal-sized text, it's still hard to read to my eyes (and fails the AAA standard). I suggest lightening the text colour for your user name to improve the contrast, and as Femke suggested, perhaps reconsider using a dark background. isaacl (talk) 15:10, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like the dark background, but I am willing to change the contents within slightly. I have changed my username to be the color of links, and also removed the boldness. As for my user talk link, I simply removed the bold. Is this sufficient? fanfanboy (block talk) 15:26, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The contrast is improved, which is good. Since I use the default white background, for me the dark background without much padding around the text still makes it a bit tricky to read, but I imagine someone using dark mode would have a different experience. isaacl (talk) 04:21, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I use dark mode as it doesn't hurt my eyes as much. But I do imagine the dark background may be somewhat of an eyesore to users with the default mode. fanfanboy (block talk) 12:23, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
just fyi, lots of us use a userscript that shows blocked users' usernames with a strikethrough. I don't recommend using strikethrough in the more visible part of your sig, since it's easy for us low-vision types to get very confused. -- asilvering (talk) 20:16, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed (hopefully) fanfanboy (blocktalk) 20:32, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections: Discussion phase

[edit]
Administrator Elections | Discussion phase

The discussion phase of the October 2024 administrator elections is officially open. As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

  • October 22–24 - Discussion phase
  • October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
  • November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

During October 22–24, we will be in the discussion phase. The candidate subpages will open to questions and comments from everyone, in the same style as a request for adminship. You may discuss the candidates at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Discussion phase.

On October 25, we will start the voting phase. The candidate subpages will close again to public questions and discussion, and everyone will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator Elections: Voting phase

[edit]
Administrator Elections | Voting phase

The voting phase of the October 2024 administrator elections has started and continues until 23:59 31st October 2024 UTC. You can participate in the voting phase at Wikipedia:Administrator elections/October 2024/Voting phase.

As a reminder, the schedule of the election is:

  • October 25–31 - SecurePoll voting phase
  • November 1–? - Scrutineering phase

In the voting phase, the candidate subpages will close to public questions and discussion, and everyone who qualifies for a vote will have a week to use the SecurePoll software to vote, which uses a secret ballot. You can see who voted, but not who they voted for. Please note that the vote tallies cannot be made public until after voting has ended and as such, it will not be possible for you to see an individual candidate's tally during the election. The suffrage requirements are different from those at RFA.

Once voting concludes, we will begin the scrutineering phase, which will last for an indeterminate amount of time, perhaps a week or two. Once everything is certified, the results will be posted on the main election page. In order to be granted adminship, a candidate must have received at least 70.0% support, calculated as Support / (Support + Oppose). As this is a vote and not a consensus, there are no bureaucrat discussions ("crat chats").

Any questions or issues can be asked on the election talk page. Thank you for your participation. Happy electing.

You're receiving this message because you signed up for the mailing list. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the list.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:30, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 November 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:04, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 November 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:42, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:54, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you for your consistently high-quality anti-vandalism work. Keep up the good work! QuicoleJR (talk) 17:33, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Much appreciated! fanfanboy (blocktalk) 17:34, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 12 December 2024

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:56, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Re: News Tap One

[edit]

Hi there, I just wanted to let you know that I restored the editor's blanking at News Tap One. Normally it would be a warn-able issue to blank the page (especially if it removes speedy or AFD templates), but since it's a new page and it was the author who blanked it we should tag it under G7 of the Criteria for Speedy Deletion instead. So in this case it's a good thing because we can remove the page faster rather than waiting for my PROD to expire. Keep up the good work on anti-vandalism! RA0808 talkcontribs 16:22, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Every mistake is a learning experience so thank you for explaining. And thanks for compliment too. I enjoy anti-vandalism as pastime so it's good to know I'm doing it right for the most part. Also good to know when I'm wrong so I don't repeat the same mistakes, so once again thanks for your correction. fanfanboy (blocktalk) 16:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fanfanboy&oldid=1262897434"