User talk:Dyork

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Archive Page Created[edit]

Given that the entries on this talk page were from 2005 - 2019 and included actions that have long since passed, I created an archive page User_talk:Dyork/Archive_1 (using H:ARC process) so that this page is now smaller and more useful. - Dyork (talk) 18:39, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dyork, Good job! Wwwhatsup (talk) 13:24, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Formally linking the Internet Society Talk page with my COI[edit]

I have noted for years on User:Dyork that I have been employed by the Internet Society, and in 2018 my account was noted as a "connected contributor" on the Talk:Internet Society page. However, the basic Template:Connected_contributor text only says a person "may" be connected. Given that a colleague User:Neville_at_Internet_Society is preparing to offer suggestions for edits to the Internet Society page, I thought it would be clearer to formally link the "connected contributor" template to my COI on my user page.

In doing so, I note that I have made contributions to the main Internet Society page. To be 100% clear, the only edits I made to the page were back in 2018 when our CEO changed from Kathy Brown to Andrew Sullivan. (See the list of edits.) Given that this was a factual edit, I believed it did not violate COI guidelines. I have not made any edits since nor do I intend to do so. - Dyork (talk) 13:34, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MANRS article COI declaration[edit]

As noted over in the userbox sidebar, I've formally declared that I have WP:COI with the newly created page for MANRS, the Mutually Agreed Norms for Routing Security. It's great that there is a page for MANRS, as this initiative from within the routing community certainly seems to me to be notable enough to be included here. I will not edit the page at all, though, as my employer, the Internet Society is providing support for the MANRS project, and I personally was very involved when it first began back in 2014, including creating the first website and engaging in other communications activities. I'm glad to answer any questions about MANRS or provide additional information, although as noted on Talk:MANRS, my Internet Society colleague Neville is the preferred channel for communication. = Dyork (talk) 16:20, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Working on pages related to Vermont media / newspapers[edit]

Through a random path, I discovered that a number of the pages for various weekly newspapers were out-of-date with regard to ownership. This sent me down the path of creating an article for Vermont Community Newspaper Group, and then going through and updating the pages for the various newspapers and their linked communities in Vermont. I would welcome expansion of that VTCNG page by others. This exploration also made me realize there are some other VT-related media pages that could use some expansion. - Dyork (talk) 16:24, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Content delivery network, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aka (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:54, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - Removed the link and spelled out the phrase. - Dyork (talk) 15:37, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Expert help[edit]

I placed an expert TAG on the GlobalSign, GeoTrust and the Digicert pages (for example: there are no references on Digicert page on cert issuance section) and I see you are active on LE editing and have expertise in this area. Can you take a look at these pages if you have time? I will continue to try to add value to them. I added a reference to LE about the domain validation method history and will continue to try to add value there as well to other CAs & PKI related pages which is becoming my hobby during this lockdown.PKIhistory (talk) 13:31, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PKIhistory: - Thank you for requesting my assistance. I will see what I can do to review the pages. - Dyork (talk) 01:45, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just spent some time on GlobalSign this morning and noticed a long comment about Quantum computing that I understand is a threat to RSA and ECC keys but not sure why it needed such a long section in their page so I cleaned it up a bit and made it smaller. Overall, their page is a bit of a mess and needs clean up. I am struggling with how to make it read better and more factual. I seem to have a lot of time on my hands so I am going to keep trying. PKIhistory (talk) 12:57, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PKIhistory: - That's great that you have time to help with this! A lot of the TLS area does need some clean-up, so thanks for taking that on! - Dyork (talk) 01:12, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dyork: There is a AfD discussion going on about GeoTrust https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/GeoTrust. I have entered my thoughts but wanted to let you know it was in process.PKIhistory (talk) 01:54, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@PKIhistory: - Thanks for letting me know about the AfD. I have commented there. A question for you. I see on the GeoTrust page that there is this text: "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. (June 2020)" Is that referring to you? I ask because you seem to be the major contributor right now. If you are the reference, do you have a connection to GeoTrust? (If so, it would be good for you to declare that on the Talk:GeoTrust page.) Thanks, again, and I do agree that all these TLS-related pages do need some help! - Dyork (talk) 01:16, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dyork: I don't know who the "conflicted" contributor is for the GeoTrust that is suggested in the COI (I have asked on the talk page for clarification and you may want to reach out to editor who suggested that for an explanation - I am trying to be cooperative as I learn). I have edited on CAs and sites connected to this industry (I really like it and am confident in my research). I am not connected to GeoTrust, GlobalSign, Thawte, Digicert, EnTrust, Comodo or any CA in any way. If so, I would declare it as I want to improve this area as it all needs help (all are poorly written for the contributions they have made - sadly so). I do have an historical interest in PKI which may make me focused a lot in this area and I don't know if this is too narrow, but it is my interest. I am still learning so if I need to declare a narrow historical, editing interest, I will take your advice (please let me know your thoughts). I desire to edit as much as I can fairly and factually in this area as long as I can. I removed some controversial material on GlobalSign, which may cause objections but it seemed obvious to me (I again don't see this as a conflict as I am not connected to GlobalSign). I did research on PGP Pretty Good Privacy that included a discussion with the counsel representing Phil Zimmerman which eventually led to a brief affiliation with PGP years ago so that might be worth me noting on my user page if it could be perceived to create any COI. I appreciate the guidance and the response.PKIhistory (talk) 02:14, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@PKIhistory: - That all sounds fine to me! I don't see any need to declare COI based on what you said. THANK YOU for the work you are doing on the TLS/SSL-related pages! - Dyork (talk) 01:42, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dyork: I got a little excited this morning and created a stub in my sandbox for Sectigo. I have never published an article and thought this potential stub was missing while all the other major certificate authorities have pages. I am trying to get enough in to show the company is notable to allow it be expanded. I just don't know what the bar is on a stub. I think it is notable given its significant market share in SSL certificates. Also, this one could face some natural opposition as there was a prior one rejected for clear reasons plus very poorly written. My sandbox https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=User:PKIhistory/sandbox (No rush - just if you/ when you have time).PKIhistory (talk) 14:22, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@PKIhistory: - Cool! Do note that Sectigo is currently a redirect over to Comodo Cybersecurity. I wrote on Talk:Comodo_Cybersecurity (scroll to the bottom) that the current page should be split out into three pages, one of which is on Sectigo. I think there are probably parts of that rejected Draft page that could be useful to incorporate, as well as perhaps some content from the Comodo Cybersecurity page. - Dyork (talk) 00:56, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dyork: Read Talk today on what you suggested. I think it should be two pages with Sectigo as its own as it appears Comodo CA was the biggest part of Comodo. I think you are right that part of the rejected article can be used in part, maybe I was too harsh. I am going to work on it this coming week and will let you know when another draft is ready.
@PKIhistory: - Sounds good! I look forward to reading your draft. - Dyork (talk) 00:34, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dyork:I am a bit demoralized as I have been following wikipedia guidelines after some learning. I am still reading guidelines but disappointed how the GeoTrust deletion has been handled. It was closed by another editor (AfD closed) and then I removed the Notability tag because I thought that was appropriate with AfD closed and removed COI as I waited a long time for other editor to respond on the Talk page (no response) then GeoTrust was reopened and re-listed. Anyway I am done commenting on that page for now because I don't understand and am pretty sad about it. I am going to work on Sectigo in a few days as it does need a page- just need to take a deep breath. I appreciate your engagement as you have been very welcoming which makes me want to continue.PKIhistory (talk) 01:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dyork: After taking time off, I updated the Sectigo draft in my sandbox. I have a lot of time next week to improve but it may be a good enough stub now to submit.PKIhistory (talk) 20:27, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@PKIhistory: That looks like a good start. I have a couple of minor suggestions. Would you like me to leave them as comments on the Talk page for that sandbox page? Or would you like me to directly edit the sandbox page? - Dyork (talk) 01:10, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dyork:Thanks. Please go ahead an edit directly in my sandbox. Appreciate any help. I hope to have in in shape this week to get a shot at publishing it. Btw, The GeoTrust AfD was re-listed by a now banned sock with user name RandomCanadian. I did not know it was a sock at the time of re-list and it all seemed odd as there were three votes for keep and none for delete. After seeing the re-list, I struck my vote as I disagreed with the process and could not understand what was going on. The sock was banned on June 6th after dong the re-list. Since the admin did a soft delete, I asked and it was restored. I will continue to work on it and hope it is not targeted again. I did some large revisions to the GlobalSign page and it is in much better shape but still needs more work. The page that really needs work is the extended validation certificate page as it has little to no references in major portions and I worry about historical accuracy.PKIhistory (talk) 16:04, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Dyork:The Sectigo draft was marked by an editor fo speedy deletion. I am not sure if I made a mistake. Also, I am not sure I can contest it as the author. Can you take a look and give me your thoughts https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Draft:Sectigo_(2)PKIhistory (talk) 14:24, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sectigo draft got rejected because one already exists that was rejected but not deleted. I was asked to edit the original which seems reasonable. The original was written by a Sock so I may have an uphill battle but I am going to give it a shot. Will keep you updated. Sounds like a good challenge to me.PKIhistory (talk) 00:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@PKIhistory: Ah, cool. Best wishes with that! - Dyork (talk) 02:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is posted, https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Draft:Sectigo.PKIhistory (talk) 14:17, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the Sectigo draft a bit. I think it is pretty good shape.PKIhistory (talk) 01:23, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Sectigo got rejected as not being notable.. I kind of give up on it. It seems not rational. It is very notable - I disagree but I don't think I can fight it. https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Draft:Sectigo PKIhistory (talk) 19:11, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dont !vote twice[edit]

At Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GeoTrust you seem to have !voted twice, probably inadvertently. Suggest you strike the second and replace it by a comment per: comment:keep:, or perhaps just use Comment. (I've used italics rather than bold on your talk page). Thanks.Djm-leighpark (talk) 02:02, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done @Djm-leighpark: - Thank you for letting me know. This is the first time I have responded to an AfD where it was "re-listed". I wasn't sure of the exact protocol to follow and didn't know if we were being asked to vote again. I now understand the intention is to get more people to vote. In that light, it makes sense for my note to be a comment. Thank you! - Dyork (talk) 21:02, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing news 2020 #4[edit]

Read this in another languageSubscription list for this newsletter

Reply tool[edit]

The number of comments posted with the Reply Tool from March through June 2020. People used the Reply Tool to post over 7,400 comments with the tool.

The Reply tool has been available as a Beta Feature at the Arabic, Dutch, French and Hungarian Wikipedias since 31 March 2020. The first analysis showed positive results.

  • More than 300 editors used the Reply tool at these four Wikipedias. They posted more than 7,400 replies during the study period.
  • Of the people who posted a comment with the Reply tool, about 70% of them used the tool multiple times. About 60% of them used it on multiple days.
  • Comments from Wikipedia editors are positive. One said, أعتقد أن الأداة تقدم فائدة ملحوظة؛ فهي تختصر الوقت لتقديم رد بدلًا من التنقل بالفأرة إلى وصلة تعديل القسم أو الصفحة، التي تكون بعيدة عن التعليق الأخير في الغالب، ويصل المساهم لصندوق التعديل بسرعة باستخدام الأداة. ("I think the tool has a significant impact; it saves time to reply while the classic way is to move with a mouse to the Edit link to edit the section or the page which is generally far away from the comment. And the user reaches to the edit box so quickly to use the Reply tool.")[1]

The Editing team released the Reply tool as a Beta Feature at eight other Wikipedias in early August. Those Wikipedias are in the Chinese, Czech, Georgian, Serbian, Sorani Kurdish, Swedish, Catalan, and Korean languages. If you would like to use the Reply tool at your wiki, please tell User talk:Whatamidoing (WMF).

The Reply tool is still in active development. Per request from the Dutch Wikipedia and other editors, you will be able to customize the edit summary. (The default edit summary is "Reply".) A "ping" feature is available in the Reply tool's visual editing mode. This feature searches for usernames. Per request from the Arabic Wikipedia, each wiki will be able to set its own preferred symbol for pinging editors. Per request from editors at the Japanese and Hungarian Wikipedias, each wiki can define a preferred signature prefix in the page MediaWiki:Discussiontools-signature-prefix. For example, some languages omit spaces before signatures. Other communities want to add a dash or a non-breaking space.

New requirements for user signatures[edit]

  • The new requirements for custom user signatures began on 6 July 2020. If you try to create a custom signature that does not meet the requirements, you will get an error message.
  • Existing custom signatures that do not meet the new requirements will be unaffected temporarily. Eventually, all custom signatures will need to meet the new requirements. You can check your signature and see lists of active editors whose custom signatures need to be corrected. Volunteers have been contacting editors who need to change their custom signatures. If you need to change your custom signature, then please read the help page.

Next: New discussion tool[edit]

Next, the team will be working on a tool for quickly and easily starting a new discussion section to a talk page. To follow the development of this new tool, please put the New Discussion Tool project page on your watchlist.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:47, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:16, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Editing news 2021 #1[edit]

Read this in another languageSubscription list for this newsletter

Reply tool[edit]

Graph of Reply tool and full-page wikitext edit completion rates
Completion rates for comments made with the Reply tool and full-page wikitext editing. Details and limitations are in this report.

The Reply tool is available at most other Wikipedias.

  • The Reply tool has been deployed as an opt-out preference to all editors at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.
  • It is also available as a Beta Feature at almost all Wikipedias except for the English, Russian, and German-language Wikipedias. If it is not available at your wiki, you can request it by following these simple instructions.

Research notes:

  • As of January 2021, more than 3,500 editors have used the Reply tool to post about 70,000 comments.
  • There is preliminary data from the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedia on the Reply tool. Junior Contributors who use the Reply tool are more likely to publish the comments that they start writing than those who use full-page wikitext editing.[2]
  • The Editing and Parsing teams have significantly reduced the number of edits that affect other parts of the page. About 0.3% of edits did this during the last month.[3] Some of the remaining changes are automatic corrections for Special:LintErrors.
  • A large A/B test will start soon.[4] This is part of the process to offer the Reply tool to everyone. During this test, half of all editors at 24 Wikipedias (not including the English Wikipedia) will have the Reply tool automatically enabled, and half will not. Editors at those Wikipeedias can still turn it on or off for their own accounts in Special:Preferences.

New discussion tool[edit]

Screenshot of version 1.0 of the New Discussion Tool prototype.

The new tool for starting new discussions (new sections) will join the Discussion tools in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures at the end of January. You can try the tool for yourself.[5] You can leave feedback in this thread or on the talk page.

Next: Notifications[edit]

During Talk pages consultation 2019, editors said that it should be easier to know about new activity in conversations they are interested in. The Notifications project is just beginning. What would help you become aware of new comments? What's working with the current system? Which pages at your wiki should the team look at? Please post your advice at mw:Talk:Talk pages project/Notifications.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:02, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging[edit]

[[U|username]] isn't what you want, that just creates a wikilink to U. You want to use {{U|username}} instead. See WP:Notifications, {{ping}}, and {{U}} for details. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:02, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for that. I was looking for an alternative to {{ping|username}} as that puts a ":" at the end of the username. Thanks for letting me know! - Dyork (talk) 16:08, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion[edit]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding reason. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is ".eco".The discussion is about the topic .eco.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

--davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:37, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Curious[edit]

This has nothing to do with Wikipedia, but did you ever have the chance to meet or communicate with this guy? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:13, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidwr: - Sadly no, I did not. I got involved with the Internet in the late 1980s while a student at the University of New Hampshire. I then got very involved in the more commercial Internet space in the Boston and New York areas, but did not get deep into the infrastructure where Jon was active. By the time I got involved with the IETF, he had long passed away (although his legacy lives on to today). Over the past years I've had the opportunities to meet many people who worked directly with him and share great memories, but that is only how I know of him. (My employer, the Internet Society also gives out the Jonathan B. Postel Service Award annually, but I am not involved with that award program.) - Dyork (talk) 22:31, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify[edit]

You have no COI related to the article about Dan York, the Scottish rugby union player, correct? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:17, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Davidwr: HA! No... no connection at all! Alas, "Dan York" is such a common name that there are many conflicts out there. I was involved early with the Internet back in the late 1980s and so I have several of the major danyork.* domains. As a result, people often find my sites and then contact me about other "Dan York"s. But I hadn't heard about the rugby guy - hey, maybe I now have someone to root for! :-) - Dyork (talk) 22:23, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
From the sound of things, you already have yourself to root for. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:32, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Davidwr: Ha! Good one. But back to sports, the only sport I actually participate in is Curling and only at a social level (i.e. not competitive). And this year there is none of that for me, as the pandemic has closed the Canadian border... and our closest curling club is across the border in Quebec. That's a far cry from rugby! 🤣 - Dyork (talk) 00:02, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You![edit]

Dear Dyork, thanks so much for welcoming me to Wikipedia last month. It was good hearing from you, and I'm so pleased to announce that my first article just went live here on Wikipedia: https://wiki.alquds.edu/?query=Jessie_Burns_Parke

Thanks again for the warm welcome. Happy day to you! AdjutrixAlba (talk) 23:24, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vimeo Livestream section merge[edit]

Hi, I thought I'd check in and see if you're still interested in reviewing the content I proposed for merging the History and Events section, as we discussed over at Talk:Vimeo Livestream? I also thought I should note that with my last post, I accidentally deleted my previous request and some of your comments. I have fixed that error. Thanks! JS Vimeo (talk) 20:26, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for NFT article response[edit]

Hi Dyork, thank you so much for your response to my editing of the NFT article!

We are a group of undergraduate students taking an engineering writing class at USC. Editing this article is one of our group assignments this semester, and I'm in charge of moving our writing to the live wiki article. Our deadline for this assignment is this Friday, Apr 9th, and our professor will grade us based on our edits on the live article. We have almost done our writing in my sandbox and I will be editing a big portion of the live article maybe tomorrow.

I have read through your comments, thank you very much! I only know how to edit in the visual editor, and it seems like that reference to the same article is automatically separated when I directly copy the text with reference from sandbox to the article using the visual editor, but I can clean these manually later. I will also revise and find another source to replace the primary source you mentioned.

Thank you again for your help!

Twitch[edit]

Just a quick note to say I recently discovered your Twitch stream. Think it is such a good idea, real shame that its not really a thing for people to make content around editing wikipedia Dexxtrall (talk) 21:20, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your kind words. It's fun to do, although I somehow don't think my little stream will ever wind up on the List of most-followed Twitch channels 🤣 There's a limited number of people who are actually interested in Wikipedia.. but I do think it is useful to help people learn more. Occasionally, I have also recorded podcast episodes about Wikipedia (ex. COI and Talk pages). I am just interested in helping people learn more and perhaps start contributing to Wikipedia. - Dyork (talk) 01:14, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ICANN[edit]

@Dyork:, I appreciate the clarification to my question on the relationship between ICANN, Public Technical Identifiers, and IANA.

You might look at the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority page. I updated as sentence there to reference The Public Technical Identifiers Corporation.

Liberty5651 (talk) 15:54, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Liberty5651:, thanks for doing that. The sentence in the lead still needed a bit of clarification as the way that it was implied that PTI had been around since 1998. The reality is that the IANA function is still the responsibility of ICANN today. It's just that rather than perform the IANA operation directly with ICANN staff, they created PTI as an affiliate organization to operate the IANA function. I tried to make the sentence a bit more clear in the lead of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority article. - Dyork (talk) 01:03, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Add Vonage to a list?[edit]

User:Dyork I see you have created the Category:Cloud Communication platforms. Would it be possible to add Vonage to this list or any other relevant list? I am not sure how to do this and am in a COI position as a Vonage employee. Thank you! SStankevich (talk) 16:36, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editing news 2021 #2[edit]

Read this in another languageSubscription list for this newsletter

Junior contributors comment completion rate across all participating Wikipedias
When newcomers had the Reply tool and tried to post on a talk page, they were more successful at posting a comment. (Source)

Earlier this year, the Editing team ran a large study of the Reply Tool. The main goal was to find out whether the Reply Tool helped newer editors communicate on wiki. The second goal was to see whether the comments that newer editors made using the tool needed to be reverted more frequently than comments newer editors made with the existing wikitext page editor.

The key results were:

  • Newer editors who had automatic ("default on") access to the Reply tool were more likely to post a comment on a talk page.
  • The comments that newer editors made with the Reply Tool were also less likely to be reverted than the comments that newer editors made with page editing.

These results give the Editing team confidence that the tool is helpful.

Looking ahead

The team is planning to make the Reply tool available to everyone as an opt-out preference in the coming months. This has already happened at the Arabic, Czech, and Hungarian Wikipedias.

The next step is to resolve a technical challenge. Then, they will deploy the Reply tool first to the Wikipedias that participated in the study. After that, they will deploy it, in stages, to the other Wikipedias and all WMF-hosted wikis.

You can turn on "Discussion Tools" in Beta Features now. After you get the Reply tool, you can change your preferences at any time in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

00:27, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Keep up the good work Vhisun (talk) 07:16, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vimeo Livestream edit request[edit]

Hello Dyork. You helped me out with a few edit requests for the Vimeo Livestream article earlier this year. I was wondering if you'd be willing to review my most recent request about the introduction? Thanks! JS Vimeo (talk) 17:00, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Verizon (mobile network)[edit]

Hi, Dyork. If you recall, you were very helpful in making needed updates to Verizon (mobile network). It may also help the article to replace Template:Infobox company with Template:Infobox brand. Would you mind reviewing this request if you have the time? Also worth noting that an IP editor changed the year Verizon's wireless service was founded to 1998. Problem is, it was founded in 2000, as I cited in my infobox request. Thanks for considering! VZEric (talk) 17:25, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2020 Census Data[edit]

Hi - I have been adding the 2020 Census population count for every town and city in select Vermont counties. Re: your comment - 2020 census information hasn't been deleted. Only added.

  • @Bde234: - Yikes... I apologize. Last night when I was going through my watchlist I saw all your edits to various Vermont towns and somehow got myself thinking you were removing the 2020 data that was there, instead of adding the 2020 data. I'm not sure how I actually misinterpreted the diffs... but maybe I should have been in bed instead of editing Wikipedia! Anyway, I'm sorry about that... and THANK YOU for going through and adding the 2020 data! - Dyork (talk) 15:59, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh good, that was what I thought originally, but then was confused. I think an earlier editor had gone through and removed 2020 numbers from within many of the articles. (relevant diff) Jessamyn (talk) 01:55, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Editing newsletter 2022 – #1[edit]

Read this in another languageSubscription list for the multilingual newsletterLocal subscription list

New editors were more successful with this new tool.

The New topic tool helps editors create new ==Sections== on discussion pages. New editors are more successful with this new tool. You can read the report. Soon, the Editing team will offer this to all editors at most WMF-hosted wikis. You can join the discussion about this tool for the English Wikipedia is at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Enabling the New Topic Tool by default. You will be able to turn it off in the tool or at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion.

The Editing team plans to change the appearance of talk pages. These are separate from the changes made by the mw:Desktop improvements project and will appear in both Vector 2010 and Vector 2022. The goal is to add some information and make discussions look visibly different from encyclopedia articles. You can see some ideas at Wikipedia talk:Talk pages project#Prototype Ready for Feedback.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk)

23:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Editing news 2022 #2[edit]

Read this in another languageSubscription list for this multilingual newsletter

Graph showing 90-minute response time without the new tool and 39-minute response time with the tool
The [subscribe] button shortens response times.

The new [subscribe] button notifies people when someone replies to their comments. It helps newcomers get answers to their questions. People reply sooner. You can read the report. The Editing team is turning this tool on for everyone. You will be able to turn it off in your preferences.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:35, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:25, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Editing news 2023 #1[edit]

Read this in another languageSubscription list for this newsletter

This newsletter includes two key updates about the Editing team's work:

  1. The Editing team will finish adding new features to the Talk pages project and deploy it.
  2. They are beginning a new project, Edit check.

Talk pages project

Screenshot showing the talk page design changes that are currently available as beta features at all Wikimedia wikis. These features include information about the number of people and comments within each discussion.
Some of the upcoming changes

The Editing team is nearly finished with this first phase of the Talk pages project. Nearly all new features are available now in the Beta Feature for Discussion tools.

It will show information about how active a discussion is, such as the date of the most recent comment. There will soon be a new "Add topic" button. You will be able to turn them off at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-discussion. Please tell them what you think.

Daily edit completion rate by test group: DiscussionTools (test group) and MobileFrontend overlay (control group)

An A/B test for Discussion tools on the mobile site has finished. Editors were more successful with Discussion tools. The Editing team is enabling these features for all editors on the mobile site.

New Project: Edit Check

The Editing team is beginning a project to help new editors of Wikipedia. It will help people identify some problems before they click "Publish changes". The first tool will encourage people to add references when they add new content. Please watch that page for more information. You can join a conference call on 3 March 2023 to learn more.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:19, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]