Wikinews:Admin action alerts

Alerts

Requests

Requesting edits to protected pages and deletion of outdated files

This is a two-part request, both needs stem from this discussion started over a year ago: Wikinews:Deletion requests#825 sxw-files, which has achieved general consensus from the community.

The first part can be handled by either a local or global sysop. The second part involves deleting several hundred files and would likely be best handled by a global sysop.

1. For the User:MGA73/Sandbox list, we need an admin to remove any links, broken or functional, to OpenOffice SXW files as was done here: Special:Diff/4805561.
2. For the Category:Print Edition (SXW), we need all listed OpenOffice SXW files deleted.

If you have any questions, needs, or concerns, reach out to MGA73 or myself.

Thank you in advance! —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:35, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

If the file page does not have {{Image info}} it might be a good idea to add that at the same time as the sxw part is removed. If my bot is granted a temporary admin status it might be able to fix most of the files in the first part and perhaps add the {{Image info}} too. Just so you know the alternative. --MGA73 (talk) 15:47, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I am a global sysop, I am writing because i noticed a request. I wrote a script that will allow you to mass unprotect and protect sites. If you want, I can do it or show you how to use it. Regards, AramilFeraxa (talk) 08:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@AramilFeraxa Thank you. Can you please unprotect the files listed in User:MGA73/Sandbox? I will then fix the pages. --MGA73 (talk) 08:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@MGA73: done. AramilFeraxa (talk) 08:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@AramilFeraxa: Thank you very much. Now that you made your script could you also undelete the 3 I added here: Special:Diff/4806310? I know its a bit silly for only 3 files but its a shame not to use your script ;-) We also need to delete 821 files. I assume the other script you mentioned on meta can delete files? --MGA73 (talk) 09:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@MGA73: yes, one of my scripts can massdelete files. But I don't know exactly what you mean about those 3 files, since they are not deleted? AramilFeraxa (talk) 10:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

One more remark about massdelete - it would be better if the files were in some category :) AramilFeraxa (talk) 10:03, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@AramilFeraxa: I would like the protection removed for the 3 files. The files to be deleted are in a category (Category:Print Edition (SXW) see dot 2 above). I also added them to a list Special:Diff/4806312 just so they are easy to find in case someone will ever wonder which files were deleted. --MGA73 (talk) 10:09, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@MGA73: ok, sorry, I misunderstood :) I unprotected those files. And as for massdelete, I can do it, but maybe I would ask the flood flag because 821 pages is a bit much though :) AramilFeraxa (talk) 10:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your help AramilFeraxa. For Michael.C.Wright's reference, I am a local sysop and I may be able to assist quickly, I only need clearer instructions what needs to be done and up to two days to respond. Seems like a non urgent issue and I had no idea what steps are needed. If anything is needed in future a request can be made here with specific instructions. Gryllida (talk) 10:46, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida: It would be a total waste of your time if you had to do 50+ edits like this Special:Diff/4806299 manually when there are other ways to do it. I would personally think Wikinews benefit much more if you would spend the time write or review articles. Besides removing the sxw part the files are now fixed and removed from Category:Files needing attention. As for the files that no longer have a protection the only question that remain is if they should be protected again. I think we should just leave the files as they are. There are 1102 files in Category:Print Edition (PDF) and why only protect those 50+? If you would like to have the files protected we should protect all files. Or perhaps move them all to Commons and keep them there.

About the 821 sxw files all that needs to be done is to delete them. If you want to do it you are ofcourse very welcome. I would however suggest that you "borrow" the script so you can also mass delete. I tried a similar script on Commons and they are nice. It takes a little time to set them up and get to know them. Much easier than to do it manually :-) --MGA73 (talk) 11:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

If you want to use my script for mass delete simply add mw.loader.load('//meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:AramilFeraxa/QD.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript'); to your common.js and go to Special:QD. If you are not sure, let me know then I can do it :) AramilFeraxa (talk) 11:48, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Gryllida would you mind if we ask AramilFeraxa to delete the files? I think that if you have time to spare it would be better if you check the pages in Category:Speedy deletion. Those probably need a local user. --MGA73 (talk) 16:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Gryllida I do not know if you saw this notice. It may not be urgent but I see no reason not just to get this done and away from the list of things to do. So unless you would like to try mass delete I will ask AramilFeraxa to delete the files. --MGA73 (talk) 16:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

MGA73, I've requested that Gryllida change the edit-protection on pages[1] listed in our update table. If she's unable to do that, I will request that AramilFeraxa do both items; 1. reduce protection on edit-protected pages listed in the table[2] and 2. mass delete all listed SXW files[3]. That way we only need to make one request of AramilFeraxa, if that makes sense. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 17:23, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Michael.C.Wright The remaining changes are supposed to happen on December 16? --MGA73 (talk) 17:33, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

The date we request the actual upgrade (change) by Phabricator is December 16. I would like to have {{Current CC Version}} in place in as many pages as possible, as well as have the ability to change the rest manually before then. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:40, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Okay. See Wikinews_talk:2024_Copyright_license_upgrade#Pages_to_update. --MGA73 (talk) 15:24, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Gryllida can you assign a flood flag for AramilFeraxa or is help needed from stewards? --MGA73 (talk) 18:33, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Context? What is this for? Gryllida (talk) 22:54, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Gryllida for deleting the files in Category:Print Edition (SXW). It will show up in recent changes. If that is to be avoided a flood flag could be a solution. Or we could just say “so be it” and delete without the flag. --MGA73 (talk) 04:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @MGA73 Please open a request for it and it can stay open for 7 days. Then I will assign the flag if these is consensus. I hope that such delay does not get in the way sufficiently annoyingly for steward action to be required. If you have a proposal for another workflow or more sense of urgency please let me know, I am happy to consider it? Gryllida (talk) 05:04, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I think a request is not needed. The discussion to delete the files was open for like a year. This is only about if the deletion of the files should be visible in recent changes or be hidden like bot edits. If you were deleting the files would you request a flood flag or would you just add it to yourself and delete? --MGA73 (talk) 05:12, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

ok done, @AramilFeraxa now has pseudo-bot flag for a week. I'm happy to take it off by request when the task is completed. Gryllida (talk) 05:17, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I thought Special:Nuke or some other button would do it, if I had knowledge how to do it without manually pressing five buttons for each page then I would have done it now. Gryllida (talk) 05:19, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

cc @Leaderboard @MGA73 Thanks Gryllida (talk) 06:26, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida Is there something I need to do here? Leaderboard (talk) 06:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

If you know, how to delete all pages belonging to the category. There are 800 pages. I don't know how to delete them in one go. Gryllida (talk) 06:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida I think AramilFeraxa has their script that can be used - but I can't do it regardless as I'm not (yet) an admin. Or a script - but again requires admin rights. Leaderboard (talk) 07:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

AramilFeraxa you now have a pseudo-bot flag so please help delete the files in Category:Print Edition (SXW). --MGA73 (talk) 12:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida, @MGA73 Done all listed files have been deleted. AramilFeraxa (talk) 09:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @AramilFeraxa! Thanks. You're no longer a bot (flood), I've just taken the flag away. What script/tool did you use for this? Gryllida (talk) 09:52, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

m:User:AramilFeraxa/QD.js and then Special:QD. AramilFeraxa (talk) 09:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Gryllida Perhaps you can clean up the rest? Delete the no longer needed category etc.? --MGA73 (talk) 10:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

category deleted. what is "etc"? Gryllida (talk) 10:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Template:PrinteditionSXW. --MGA73 (talk) 12:20, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Ping Gryllida. Template above can be deleted. --MGA73 (talk) 20:46, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Just a status: I think except deleting Template:PrinteditionSXW now everything have been taken care of or it is also listed in other requests. --MGA73 (talk) 18:31, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Leaderboard perhaps? --MGA73 (talk) 15:28, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

@MGA73 Not sure why that needs to be deleted specifically? Leaderboard (talk) 16:21, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

Leaderboard, because we deleted all the sxw-files so it is not unused. --MGA73 (talk) 17:24, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

@MGA73 Why not keep it depreciated instead? Leaderboard (talk) 03:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

@Leaderboard works for me too if you prefer that. --MGA73 (talk) 08:41, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

┌────────────────┘
I deprecated the template similar to {{Archive}}. There are only two pages that link to it; this one and one in userspace specifically looking for untranscluded templates.

Can an admin now edit-protect {{PrinteditionSXW}}?

Thank you! —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:37, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Done to an autoconfirmed level. This is not a high-use or high-risk template making admin-level protection unnecessary. Leaderboard (talk) 15:36, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Deploy new archive templates to old articles

As part of the Wikinews:2024 Copyright license upgrade project, we need to deploy new archive templates to old articles in order to convey the fact that the old articles are licensed under an old copyright license. Because archived articles are edit-protected, this work must be done by either a local or global admin.

This work can be done immediately:

1. For all articles in Category:Public domain articles, replace {{Archived}} or {{Archive}} with {{Archived-PD}}
2. For all remaining articles that include {{Archived}} or {{Archive}}, replace with {{Archived-cc-2.5}}

You can read a full discussion about this need here: Wikinews talk:2024 Copyright license upgrade#Mark all articles with cc-by-2.5?

Your assistance is greatly appreciated! —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 16:35, 13 December 2024 (UTC); edited 14:23, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Great! I have asked at meta if there are someone who have a good idea how this can be done now that community is not very active and it can take weeks to get 5 people to vote. Lets see if someone have a good idea. --MGA73 (talk) 18:29, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

i will close the request on Sunday lets see if it gets five votes by then. i hope it gives you enough time to get started. do you already have the code? can i look at it? i think @Leaderboard is planning to implement this. Gryllida (talk) 18:59, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida This is straightforward to implement - I'm waiting for the bot approval request first. Leaderboard (talk) 04:07, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright Also see {{PD-Article}} which I can see on the PD articles - I presume that needs to be removed? Leaderboard (talk) 09:26, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

It wasn't my intention to remove {{PD-Article}}. I was trying to keep the changes to a minimum and keep it as simple as possible. However, if you guys think it's better/cleaner to have the one template serve both purposes (notify of CC license and archived status), I can very easily update the verbiage of {{Archived-PD}}. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:46, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

As an example lets look at 'Incident' at East London tube station. The existing text is this:

 {{PD-Article}}
{{archive}}

After the change it should only say:

{{Archived-PD}}

So the task is to find all variants of the two templates (PD-Article and PD article) + (Archive and Archived) no matter the order of those template and replace them with Archived-PD.

The tricky part is that there are lots of ways to make it hard for someone to find all cases. In the example above there is a space before the template. And other variants could be:

{{PD article }}
{{ PD article}}
{{Template:PD article}}
{{PD_article}}

And the two templates could be right after eachother on the same line, there could be a space or a linebreak or there could be a category between them.

So my guess is that the easiest is to make a bot run and once complete then make a list of pages that was not changed and see why not.

It might be easier if temporary categories are added untill all are fixed. But I guess Leaderboard will be the best judge of that. --MGA73 (talk) 11:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

@MGA73 I think mw:Manual:Pywikibot/template.py should be able to handle all of this - I do not foresee this to be an issue right now. Leaderboard (talk) 12:49, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

@MGA73, Leaderboard: {{Archived-PD}} doesn't reference or mention the public domain license. It merely states the fact the article is archived and no longer edit-able. My intention was to leave {{PD article}} in place (fewer moving parts or things to touch/change).

However, if the thought is doing it all in one template is better and is easy to accomplish, I can change the verbiage in {{Archived-PD}}. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:19, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright I personally think that two templates isn't needed, but either way, let me know. Leaderboard (talk) 01:59, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

@Leaderboard and Michael.C.Wright If only one template is needed for articles licensed cc-by-2.5 (and 4.0) then I think it would make sense also only to use one template for articles licensed PD. I think that if replace.py is used the two templates can be replaced by one template with only one edit where the use of template.py would require two edits? But it is not a big deal to me so I will support both options. Template.py is probably safer so we can easily defend any extra edits. So don't let me keeping you from putting Leaderbot to work. --MGA73 (talk) 19:22, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

I have updated the verbiage of {{Archived-PD}} by copying the pertinent text from {{PD-Article}}. We are now okay to proceed as follows:

1. For all articles in Category:Public domain articles, replace {{Archived}} or {{Archive}} and {{PD-Article}} with {{Archived-PD}} (removing two templates and placing one new template)
2. For all remaining articles that include {{Archived}} or {{Archive}}, replace with {{Archived-cc-2.5}}

I have also updated the action item in the project page. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright and @MGA73 First part Done - there were some initial edge case bugs which were quickly fixed. I'll do the second part tomorrow or so - there's a lot more articles to process. Leaderboard (talk) 16:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright and @MGA73 Second part Done. Leaderboard (talk) 06:01, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

@Leaderboard and Michael.C.Wright: Great. But what about Category:News briefs? They are a sort of articles too? --MGA73 (talk) 15:55, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Sort of. Here are two conversations about briefs and/or shorts: [4], [5] They should likely be treated with the same {{Archived-cc-2.5}} and possibly even {{Archived-PD}} in some cases. @Leaderboard:, could the script be used in this case as well? We would need to go through and somehow ensure they get the right template based on the date of publication though. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 18:52, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright It could yes, but should they also be fully-protected (as most of them don't seem to be right now)? Leaderboard (talk) 06:24, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

I believe we should while we have the momentum, the awareness, and the active admins to do so. I believe that since some are already edit-protected and our WN:Archive conventions (official policy) support it, doing so should be uncontroversial. There is the question of w:Chesterton's fence that could be applied. Maybe Heavy Water is aware of some historical, functional reason many of our archived news briefs aren't edit protected and should remain so. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:27, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

I would say go ahead. Worst thing that can happen is that they have to be unprotected. No big deal. --MGA73 (talk) 21:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

@MGA73 and @Michael.C.Wright Done - the only problem was that the bot ended up flooding RC since the bot status was not applied for the protection part for some reason. Leaderboard (talk) 06:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@Leaderboard In the future there will probably not be mass protections of pages so it should not be a problem. But looking at Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Archived it seems there are still some left? --MGA73 (talk) 08:36, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@MGA73 Fixed some of them; the others seem to be irrelevant (such as discussion/talk pages)? Let me know if there are content pages that still need template change/protection. Leaderboard (talk) 10:28, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@Leaderboard yes the discussions should not be changed. As far as I can tell there are two Briefs left. --MGA73 (talk) 10:54, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@MGA73 Done Leaderboard (talk) 11:03, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright, Gryllida, Leaderboard: I think it was a great idea to fix archived articles like this. Also I know it was a bit frustrating sometimes to make this work when discussions ended up in multiple places and it was not fully clear what needed to be changed and when. Thank you everyone for all the involvement in the license change! --MGA73 (talk) 11:23, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

About the Briefs, I'm not sure why they've never been subject to the normal archival process. I can only guess they might've been seen as not on par with content (not being in mainspace), only material written and reviewed that was used to produce the recordings, which then were considered content. It makes sense to protect them as a vast collection of targets for malicious actors that no one needs to be editing. Great work, y'all! Heavy Water (talk) 01:06, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Articles needing archived

We need an admin to archive many of the articles that are published, but not archived. The process is temporarily unique in that as a result of our recent project Wikinews:2024 Copyright license upgrade, all articles published before December 16 will need to have {{Archived-cc-2.5}} placed on them to reflect our old license. Articles published after December 16 will receive {{Archived}} as normal.

The following DPL should work for identifying pages that need to be archived:

<DynamicPageList>
allowcachedresults = true
category=Published
notcategory=Archived
notcategory=AutoArchived
notcategory=Retracted articles
namespace=wiki
addfirstcategorydate=true
</DynamicPageList>

Let me know if you have any questions regarding the two templates, or the project and thank you in advance for the help! —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 16:22, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

I plan to work on this on some time, by writing a bot that will handle the archival process. Leaderboard (talk) 06:07, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright This has mostly been done. Articles that have not been archived are articles whose last edit (not the same as published) are less than 3 weeks old - expect this to eventually be tweaked once the bot starts running unsupervised. There is also a chance articles "right at the border" may have an incorrect template - there are none right now, and any that do exist should be easy to fix. Leaderboard (talk) 11:25, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Something interesting has happened involving some articles previously in Category:Published. It looks like a number of published articles have been removed from that category but still exist in the archived category.

The following DPL can be used to help identify the pages:

<DynamicPageList>
category=Archived
notcategory=Published
namespace=wiki
addfirstcategorydate=true
</DynamicPageList>

When you say 'right at the border' do you mean the December 16 date of license update?

Thanks as always, and Merry Christmas! —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:13, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright That's fixed, and yes. Leaderboard (talk) 16:21, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Replace redirect code at template:archive

I have made an edit request at the following: Template talk:Archived but the edit is needed at Template:Archive, which is redirected to Template:Archived. The redirect also affects the talk page. So to be clear, I'm posting here as well. Please see the full request here. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 16:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Done Leaderboard (talk) 05:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

129.63.91.8

Mass creation of non news related articles. BigKrow (talk) 17:49, 3 January 2025 (UTC)