“Suppress” is an unfortunate term[edit]

The newsletter says that in a few days “Oversight” will be changed to”Suppress” for technical reasons. Do what you must behind the curtain, in the code, but please do not tell users that their contributions have been suppressed. It smacks of dictatorships, injustice, censorship, and suppression of free expression. Please leave the viewable text with Oversight. Words matter. Edison (talk) 23:17, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Edison as mentioned in the newsletter [t]his will not affect the name shown to users and is simply a change in the technical name of the user group. This change is being made to the MediaWiki software but will not affect the displayed name on software generated pages. All this means from what I can understand is that the technical name, i.e. the one used in URL for Special:ListUsers/suppress will be "suppress" instead of "oversight". Once the change is made, based on MediaWiki:Group-suppress having the content "Oversighters", the software will use this word when referring to the user group. This means that users will only see "Oversighters" / "Oversight" when the software created page mentions this user group, such as on Special:ListUsers. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 00:05, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We should rename Oversight to Suppress. TSOPar (talk) 16:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per the very conversation you just replied to, that was done. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 16:27, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

recommend bot to scrub your newsletter delivery list[edit]

User:Yapperbot/Pruner is currently in use on WP:FRS, pruning the names of inactive editors from newsletter subscriber lists so their respective talk pages don't become over-filled with newsletter announcements. When I was Signpost's publication manager I irregularly scrubbed our list after finding massmessage error reports showing which talk pages were too big to receive messages. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:48, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Chris troutman, User:Yapperbot/Pruner doesn't seem to work with Mass Message lists as far as I aware. I do get your reasoning, and in theory I could support use of this bot if it works with an inactivity time of a number of years no less than 1 year. This is because this newsletter is also an easier way for inactive admins to keep an eye on what is changing onwiki. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 23:38, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

late to the party but if this can be made to work with most newsletters that would be great. I've done many manual removals over the years and they are a pain to get done on those long lists. Usually it's because I see a talk page where bots are sending newsletters and archive bts are creating archive after archive of unread newsletters. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:41, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. Ideally it would be good to get this to work. I was thinking about creating a pull request to JJMC89's bot source code to allow their mass message manager bot to auto remove while also looking for users to rename etc. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 01:33, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, I would create a separate bot task for this (though as that bot is already making edits for those who are renamed, it makes sense IMO to combine this with inactivity removals). Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 01:44, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming newsletter[edit]

I'm busy IRL until the 4th of April, so if anyone else wants to write and release the newsletter go ahead. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 10:56, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This months is behind schedule, though I intend to finish and publish today. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 23:23, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Published this months Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 23:48, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Query[edit]

I was surprised at the wording in today's newsletter about the new activity requirements for administrators, specifically, "if an administrator has not made at least 100 edits over a period of 5 years they may be desysopped for inactivity." What puzzles me is the "may"...does that mean that the requirements may apply sometimes and not other times? I'd take my question to the RfC but it's been closed for a while and I doubt anyone watches its talk page at this point so I'm bringing the question here to ask whether this wording was an editorial decision or taken directly from the RfC. Thanks for any information you can offer! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:50, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz, the wording of may in the newsletter is taken from the linked policy though this likely could be word-smithed on the policy page to be are automatically which is what I think the intent was. At the moment, technically, a bureaucrat still signs off on the removal of admin perms for inactivity and as such could choose to delay in theory? Again, I'm not sure why they would, but I suspect the choice of may does not have any particular importance and was just a difference in the non-finalised wording from the RfC to the wording used in the policy. Do correct me if I am wrong. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 01:22, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: The "may" formulation was used in the inactivity policy prior to the recent change. Espresso Addict (talk) 03:44, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noting that. Dreamy Jazz ^{talk to me | my contributions} 12:42, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the additional information, Espresso Addict and Dreamy Jazz. I did weigh in on that RFC when it was open but I didn't check back regularly to read over the closure decision. I realize that resysopping is left to the bureaucrats to decide but usually if there are any serious questions or doubts about a editor who wants the tools back, there is a pretty active discussion on WP:BN about it so it was surprising to consider that so much latitude would be left to bureaucrats to decide what to do in individual cases. Thanks again. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:56, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User Moriori[edit]

Hi Team,

Im not sure if this is the right place but unfortunately Moriori passed away this morning 1st June 2022, Aged 86 peacefully in Kerikeri, New Zealand. He was an Admin for over 16 years. He asked that I was to notify his admin friends

keriboi@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moriori (talk • contribs) 02:19, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have notified WP:BN. May he rest in peace. Thank you for your service to the project. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 02:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rest in peace - 86 years old is a long time... Thingofme (talk) 11:36, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]