User talk:Gopher65

Being bothered by User:Pi zero
He is bothering me with rubbish each edit. He is never contributing. He deletes articles comments sites here, although the article is existing. Articles under development are clean up articles. I might not write about RB Leipzig. My started articles have interest and he says that other archived articles are which from amateur clubs, university clubs or something else. He wants to rename my name here and is not rename me. My articles are written after the style such as about other proven football match reports. He is psychic unable to name reasons. Please remove him from the board! He neither productive nor socially competent or educated, for a globally representative on public free sites. --Nikebrand (talk) 21:45, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Digg.com suffers user revolt
Hi, and thanks for the [//en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Digg.com_suffers_user_revolt&diff=2796278&oldid=441753 change] you made to that article. However, i feel that you inadvertently also switched the protocol part of the link, from HTTP to HTTPS. Is it possible you could change it back, or should i add another  to the talk page first? -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 11:02, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Changed to protocol-relative. --Pi zero (talk) 12:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks Pi zero:)! &mdash; Gopher65talk 01:01, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom election 2015
Would you be willing to stand for ArbCom again this year? If you don't wish to nominate yourself, I would be happy to nominate you. --Pi zero (talk) 17:04, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late response. If you need a nominee, I'll accept. I saw the election notice, but I didn't want to self-nom because I'm not active enough right now to truly qualify, but if arb-com is actually needed I can schedule in the time to deal with a situation, if I was elected. I honestly don't generally come on more than once a week normally though, barring a big event. Busssssssy time for me. &mdash; Gopher65talk 00:06, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Pi zero (talk) 00:23, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on your election. Hawkeye7 (talk) 08:56, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Seems a wee bit overdue!!
Sweet heavens! How did this get missed?! --Bddpaux (talk)
 * Thanks;) &mdash; Gopher65talk 19:12, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom election 2016
Hi. As a current Arb, are you willing to stand again this year? I'd be happy to nominate you, or of course you could nominate yourself. --Pi zero (talk) 01:27, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure, nominate away:)! &mdash; Gopher65talk 15:40, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Need help on Wikinews Main Page
Hello. I started a request at Talk:Main Page on removing interlanguage links, i.e. moving links to Wikidata, and then de-collapsing navigational sections at the bottom of the Main Page. Can you please check? --George Ho (talk) 18:19, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom election 2017
As a current Arb, would you be willing to stand for Arbcom again this year? If you don't wish to nominate yourself, I would be happy to nominate you. --Pi zero (talk) 18:13, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I know this is late, but for the future you can always nom me if you need more nominees. Arbcom is rarely needed on Wikinews, and while I'm not particularly active anymore, I do check Wikipedia and Wikinews every few days. I was apparently logged out for the past two weeks and didn't notice, which is why I didn't see this message until now, but normally I'll respond within a reasonable amount of time. &mdash; Gopher65talk 16:39, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * At the very last moment, I flinched at the prospect of a runoff election between, what, five out of seven nominees for four slots?, and withdrew one of my votes just before the end of the voting period. We had, tbh, seven excellent nominees, and faced with withdrawing one vote somewhere I withdrew the last one nominated, which was you.  I felt bad about it (which, on reflection, I would have felt no matter which I'd chosen; but, I admit I was relieved we didn't need a runoff).  --Pi zero (talk) 20:09, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Reviews
Some rocky moments getting back into the swing of review, I see. At some point we decided it would be best to avoid writing specific death/injury numbers for a disaster into its headline. Ah, well.

Much appreciated; I've been struggling to catch up with the review queue, lately. --Pi zero (talk) 20:13, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok. I'll keep that in mind. I also flaked out and added a source, which, in retrospect, a reviewer shouldn't do, as Acagastya pointed out. And I didn't notice that the city and region had been mixed up in a sentence. I'll do better next time;). &mdash; Gopher65talk 20:20, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom election 2018
Are you available to stand for the committee this year? I see you said last year you'd be willing to stand if needed; does that still hold? --Pi zero (talk) 20:19, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Yup, that still holds. I'm only minimally active for a good chuck of each year right now, but I read my emails and see alerts, so I can be gotten ahold of when needed:). &mdash; Gopher65talk 01:15, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Gryllida (talk) 20:18, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
 * No problem;). &mdash; Gopher65talk 01:05, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Growing Wikinews to counter the Balkanization of the body politic
Hello:

I'm asking all the Wikinews administrators for their thoughts on how Wikinews and the Wikimedia Foundation more generally might respond more effectively to the challenges to democracy and world peace that many people perceive in the rise of the xenophobic right in the US, Europe, India, the Philippines, and elsewhere. I've proposed a workshop on this subject for WikiConference North America, October 18-21, and I've engaged User:Pi zero and User:Gryllida in discussing this at Water cooler/proposals. Pi zero and Gryllida think the numbers I scraped from Wikinews are wrong, because they paint a dark picture of Wikinews.

I think there is a great need and opportunity to grow Wikinews, whether or not the reality matches my interpretation of the numbers from Wikinews.

I hope you will contribute your thoughts to this discussion -- both online and hopefully also at WikiConference North America.

Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 01:34, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

making news writing easier
I think you remarked earlier that news writing should be made easier for people at one of the water coolers. Could you please check the links at my user page under the section 'experiment 1' and share your thoughts. Maybe there is room for improving one of these approaches. --Gryllidamsg/chat 21:28, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Please review
Hi Gopher65

Please review:

Current review queue as of 22:51, 18 April 2019 (UTC):


 * 18 April 2019: Donation drive raises over US$1 million to rebuild Louisiana churches after Notre Dame de Paris also catches fire
 * 17 April 2019: Sudanese protesters protect defense ministry sit-in
 * 17 April 2019: Officials find fire alarm sounded 23 minutes before the fire was reported in Notre Dame, Paris
 * 7 April 2019: Students compete in world's second Neurosurgery Olympiad in Tyumen, Russia

For inspiration here are Easter Orange apples, and Kumis (fermented milk):



Happy holidays!!!

--Gryllida (talk) 22:51, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom election 2019
As a current Arb, would you be willing to stand for Arbcom again this year? If you don't wish to nominate yourself, I would be happy to nominate you. --Pi zero (talk) 02:50, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure, why not. I can't believe it's been a year already! &mdash; Gopher65talk 00:15, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Cool. I've nominated you. --Pi zero (talk) 01:06, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I flinched again. --Pi zero (talk) 19:55, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hah, that's ok. I'm ok being on ArbCom or not:). &mdash; Gopher65talk 02:07, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

You.....
...still around??--Bddpaux (talk) 17:06, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yup, but not terribly active. &mdash; Gopher65talk 23:29, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

How we will see unregistered users
Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Reviewer
Hello. Your account has the reviewer permission but you do not appear to have reviewed any article in over four years. The permission expiry policy requires no more than two years pass between each review you carry out. I’m inviting you to carry out a review of an article on the next seven days. Otherwise the permission will be removed from your account. [24Cr][talk] 00:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Temporary change to article length
Hello. As a reviewer, this note is just to let you know we are implementing a trial from February 1 to April 30 to encourage more articles to be published per the outcome of a current proposal. The minimum requirements for article length will be one paragraph of at least a hundred words. At the end of the trial the requirements will return to normal (3 paragraphs etc) and there will be an evaluation discussion about the trial. Happy reviewing! [24Cr][talk] 23:15, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Temporary change to freshness
Hello. As a reviewer, this note is just to let you know we are implementing a trial from July 4 to October 4 to enable more articles to be reviewed per the outcome of a current proposal. The freshness window is being extended to about five to seven days. At the end of the trial the window will continue to be at 5-7 days while we discuss whether to adopt the change permanently or not. Happy reviewing! [24Cr][talk] 17:37, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Your recent (in)activity
Hello. From what I noticed, your last edit and your last activity log occurred in July 2021, nearly two years ago. Per WN:PEP, those inactive for at least two years will lose their user permission rights, like "administrator" rights. I've not yet requested de-adminship. Actutally, this is just a notice. I may have to re-notify you soon before my request. George Ho (talk) 18:36, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi George. That's fine, you can de-admin me. I keep thinking I'll have time to come back on and be active again, but I'm busier all the time. I do not currently foresee a time when I'll be able to contribute significantly again. If such a time arises, I can always reapply for permissions at that time, should I feel the need:). &mdash; Gopher65talk 01:48, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not a bureaucrat, honestly. Speaking of bureaucrats... Would you do the honors and do as this admin wishes. Thanks. George Ho (talk) 19:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 * George, I appreciate your many years of enforcing PEP. It takes dedication to track this as closely as you do. That said, I question the value of enforcing PEP. Wikinews needs more, not fewer, contributors with permissions. PEP was about a perceived danger of inactive admin accounts getting hijacked or otherwise compromised. As far as I know, this has never actually happened. Perhaps the time has come to re-evaluate PEP, rather than enforcing it. Cheers, SVTCobra 19:50, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the sentiment, but how do we trust this admin to be re-active and use this account frequently? Furthermore, this isn't about PEP generally but about this person specifically. Must we use your concerns about PEP in order to prevent this person's admin tools from being taken away? George Ho (talk) 06:50, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * We obviously can't know if an admin will return to activity. But why is it important for an account to be used frequently? For your second question, certainly no! My opinions are just mine. It should be a community decision. It is unclear to me, however, why you say it is not about PEP, but about Gopher65 specifically. Cheers, SVTCobra 07:14, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * All this dialog notwithstanding, this person is OK with being de-admin'd, so I intend to take action accordingly.--Bddpaux (talk) 14:22, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
 * This person is still an admin. What happened to taking action? George Ho (talk) 07:35, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Your reviewer rights revisited
Hey again. As I still see, since your previous notice last year, you still haven't reviewed at least one article within the timeframe. Per WN:PEP, I may have no choice but to request that your reviewer tools be taken away. Of course, you could've used the Easy Peer Review tool, which isn't recorded in review log. However, your remaining tools will still be taken away if you haven't used the gadget for at least two years. George Ho (talk) 22:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello again. This is your second notice about your reviewer tools. As I see, since the last notice, I've not yet seen your review log lately. As I'm sad to say this, I may likely soon start a request at WN:FR/RFP to have your tools taken away, despite the Easy Peer Review tool. --George Ho (talk) 07:25, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

I have just now requested removal of your reviewer tools. I invite you for your input there: Flagged revisions/Requests for permissions/Removal/Gopher65. --George Ho (talk) 21:17, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

social media (cross-posted to all members of reviewer group)
Hi, Water_cooler/miscellaneous may be of interest to you as a reviewer, thanks and regards, Gryllida (talk) 05:53, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Requesting a review
Hi @Gopher65, I can see you're still a reviewer. I know it's been a while, but I was wondering if you could review my first Wikinews article here: World Athletics Indoor Championships concludes in Glasgow with new world records and significant wins. It seems like Wikinews has been inactive lately, and I fear that the article will go stale and get deleted if it's not reviewed in the next week.

Thank you, --Habst (talk) 16:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikinews:Flagged revisions/Requests for permissions/Removal/Gopher65
'''Note! Your Wikinews permission(s) have been removed.'''
 * Under the permission expiry policy (enacted October 13, 2012) the permissions held by your account have been reduced due to inactivity, or lack of use.


 * Section 4 of the policy provides for fast-tracking reacquisition of permissions. We all understand that real-life commitments can severely curtail the level of commitment you can give to Wikinews; the permission reduction is not intended as a reflection on your past work, or to imply you are unwelcome. The aim in curtailing permissions is to address, and concern that a long period of inactivity means you may not be up-to-date with current policy and practices.



I hope you do return soon. [24Cr][talk] 00:02, 9 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Same we could use oldies but goodies still around here! BigKrow (talk) 00:09, 9 June 2024 (UTC)