User talk:Donald Albury
 | Warning about paying for editing or other actions on Wikipedia This user is not affiliated with any group or organization that charges a fee for any activity relating to Wikipedia. If you have seen an advertisement for, or received any kind of message from, someone who claims that they can help you with any kind of issue with Wikipedia for a payment, it may be a scam. If any such advertisement or message refers to this user name, please  mail me a report. |
| This is a Wikipedia user discussion page.
This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Donald_Albury. |
 |
| To leave a message on this page, click here. If you email me, be aware that even if I am actively editing, I cannot always access my email and it may be a day or two before you receive a reply. *Post new messages to the bottom of my talk page.
Comments which fail to follow the rules above may be immediately deleted. |
|
| --> Archive 14 - Archive 13 - Archive 12 - Archive 11 - Archive 10 -
Archive 9 - Archive 8 - Archive 7 - Archive 6 - Archive 5 - Archive 4 - Archive 3 - Archive 2 - Archive 1 |
Archives |
|
Licensing rights granted to Wikimedia Foundation |
|---|---|
| I grant non-exclusive permission for the Wikimedia Foundation Inc. to relicense my text and media contributions, including any images, audio clips, or video clips, under any copyleft license that it chooses, provided it maintains the free and open spirit of the GFDL. This permission acknowledges that future licensing needs of the Wikimedia projects may need adapting in unforeseen fashions to facilitate other uses, formats, and locations. It is given for as long as this banner remains. |
 | This user is aware of the designation of the following as contentious topics:
|
Dunedin, FL
[edit]I represent the Dunedin History Museum and the city historian. The reference link(s) to the first land grant and the incorporation of the city is from an old incorrect city of Dunedin page. The dates 1852 and 1925 are incorrect for the first land grant and the founding of the city.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.96.115.241 (talk • contribs) 15:10 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Arecaceae
[edit]In fact that editor has repeatedly refused to advise me of what the problem is. I'm surprised to hear that editor is an experienced editor as I had not seen need to check. Right off attempting to inject FRINGE political bias and going on to repeatedly demand I debate positions I don't hold is strange for an experienced editor. I have said several times that we can remove and change any parts of my added text and asked how he wants to do that: He still refuses to reply instead insisting on these debates. Invasive Spices (talk) 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – April 2024
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2024).
Administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- An RfC is open to convert all current and future community discretionary sanctions to (community designated) contentious topics procedure.
Technical news
- The Toolforge Grid Engine services have been shut down after the final migration process from Grid Engine to Kubernetes. (T313405)
Arbitration
- An arbitration case has been opened to look into "the intersection of managing conflict of interest editing with the harassment (outing) policy".
Miscellaneous
- Editors are invited to sign up for The Core Contest, an initiative running from April 15 to May 31, which aims to improve vital and other core articles on Wikipedia.
Survey
[edit]Hi and thanks for your recent participation in AfD. I would like to hear your thoughts about the process. Please check this survey if you are willing to respond. FYI I found your participation via XTools.Czarking0 (talk) 02:46, 6 October 2025 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – October 2025
[edit]News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2025).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Arbitration
- After a motion, arbitration enforcement page protections no longer need to be logged in the AELOG. A bot now automatically posts protections at WP:AELOG/P. To facilitate this bot, protection summaries must include a link to the relevant CT page (e.g.
[[WP:CT/BLP]]), and you will receive talk page reminders if you forget to specify the contentious topic but otherwise indicate it is an AE action.
inquiry about a suspicious account that appears disruptive
[edit]I am requesting administrative attention regarding a user's recent actions. I've included a link to their talk page, which documents a history of disruptive behavior. Most recently, this user moved one of my pages from main space and, in response to my concerns, provided what appears to be an automated response that lacked clear, actionable steps for resolution. I've since responded to the user, requesting that they restore the page. Given the user's apparent history—which includes multiple past complaints for disruption on their page—I am escalating this matter to an administrator for intervention and guidance. Please advise on the appropriate next steps
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Praxidicae RedBeardBarbarossa (talk) 19:19, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
- @RedBeardBarbarossa: A suspicious account? Really? @Praxidicae: is an editor with nine years experience and over 170,000 edits. The edits you linked are part of a rather low-key content dispute. What specifically do you think they did that is a violation of our policies and guidelines? Donald Albury 19:37, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
- Apologies, I'm not trying to waste your time. thank you for looking into it; While this may not be a clear-cut policy violation, I'm finding it difficult to determine what criteria would justify labeling the action as a 'disruption,' since a specific threshold isn't clearly defined. I'm new here, so I'm simply seeking guidance, especially since I've seen other users report similar issues regarding the removal of specific information from well-vetted references. If the standard protocol requires attempting to settle this issue before escalating, that is fine. I chose to escalate because I believed I was observing a pattern of problematic behavior. If I need to wait, or if there is no clear evidence of maliciousness, I can retract my statement. However, I believe situations like this should be monitored regardless. The site is susceptible to automated and user accounts that, while not strictly violating policies, can diminish the overall user experience—an unfortunate reality of the current internet environment RedBeardBarbarossa (talk) 23:51, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
- Hey just saw this. I have nothing to add to it other than hysterical laughter. SPOOKYDICAE👻 19:44, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
Hello. In your close, would you please strike out "move request started by non-ECP editor (see edit notice at top of page)
"? It incorrectly implies that non-extendedconfirmed users may not participate on the talk page or start move requests. When the CT talk notice says
The following restrictions apply to everyone editing this article:
This page is protected. You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account
(emphasis added), it doesn't mean you must be extended-confirmed to edit the talk page, which is not protected (nor subject to an extended confirmed restriction, which is different and can't be imposed by a single admin). While a talk page can be protected under the contentious topics procedure, the WP:STANDARDSET of restrictions does not provide an admin authority to ban all non-ECP users from a talk page that isn't protected (in particular, EC protected). ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 08:50, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
The Signpost: 20 October 2025
[edit]- News and notes: Board shuffles, LLM blocks increase, IPs are going away
- Special report: The election that isn't
- Interview: The BoT bump
- In the media: An incident at WikiConference North America; WMF reports AI-related traffic drop and explains Wikipedia to US conservatives
- Traffic report: One click after another
- Humour: Wikipedia pay rates
Adequate citation
[edit]I looked into that before making the edit. What's good enough? I have found articles from the Polk County Historical Association's quarterly publication that use the word (the share dot google dot com link isn't accepted by Wikipedia, unfortunately, but if you search up the June 1976 issue, p. 5, fourth paragraph, you will find it easily), and obituaries that refer to people that way (here's one from 2013: https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/name/wofford-stidham-obituary?pid=166766967), and news articles (see https://ufdcimages.uflib.ufl.edu/UF/00/02/82/92/00988/09-20-2014.pdf, headline on p. 3 from an issue in Sept. 2014). But none of those say "this is the right word," they just use it appropriately. What would be the preferred reference? PFrisbie (talk) 18:16, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- In the end, I went with the newspaper article. PFrisbie (talk) 18:43, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
Guide to temporary accounts
[edit]Hello, Donald Albury. This message is being sent to remind you of significant upcoming changes regarding logged-out editing.
Starting 4 November, logged-out editors will no longer have their IP address publicly displayed. Instead, they will have a temporary account (TA) associated with their edits. Users with some extended rights like administrators and CheckUsers, as well as users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will still be able to reveal temporary users' IP addresses and all contributions made by temporary accounts from a specific IP address or range.
How do temporary accounts work?
- When a logged-out user completes an edit or a logged action for the first time, a cookie will be set in this user's browser and a temporary account tied with this cookie will be automatically created for them. This account's name will follow the pattern:
~2025-12345-67(a tilde, year of creation, a number split into units of 5). - All subsequent actions by the temporary account user will be attributed to this username. The cookie will expire 90 days after its creation. As long as it exists, all edits made from this device will be attributed to this temporary account. It will be the same account even if the IP address changes, unless the user clears their cookies or uses a different device or web browser.
- A record of the IP address used at the time of each edit will be stored for 90 days after the edit. Users with the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right will be able to see the underlying IP addresses.
- As a measure against vandalism, there are two limitations on the creation of temporary accounts:
- There has to be a minimum of 10 minutes between subsequent temporary account creations from the same IP (or /64 range in case of IPv6).
- There can be a maximum of 6 temporary accounts created from an IP (or /64 range) within a period of 24 hours.
Temporary account IP viewer user right
- Administrators may grant the temporary account IP viewer (TAIV) user right to non-administrators who meet the criteria for granting. Importantly, an editor must make an explicit request for the permission (e.g. at WP:PERM/TAIV)—administrators are not permitted to assign the right without a request.
- Administrators will automatically be able to see temporary account IP information once they have accepted the Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy via Special:Preferences or via the onboarding dialog which comes up after temporary accounts are deployed.
Impact for administrators
- It will be possible to block many abusers by just blocking their temporary accounts. A blocked person won't be able to create new temporary accounts quickly if the admin selects the autoblock option.
- It will still be possible to block an IP address or IP range.
- Temporary accounts will not be retroactively applied to contributions made before the deployment. On Special:Contributions, you will be able to see existing IP user contributions, but not new contributions made by temporary accounts on that IP address. Instead, you should use Special:IPContributions for this (see a video about IPContributions in a gallery below).
Rules about IP information disclosure
- Publicizing an IP address gained through TAIV access is generally not allowed (e.g. ~2025-12345-67 previously edited as 192.0.2.1 or ~2025-12345-67's IP address is 192.0.2.1).
- Publicly linking a TA to another TA is allowed if "reasonably believed to be necessary". (e.g.
~2025-12345-67 and ~2025-12345-68 are likely the same person, so I am counting their reverts together toward 3RR
, but not Hey ~2025-12345-68, you did some good editing as ~2025-12345-67) - See Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer § What can and can't be said for more detailed guidelines.
Useful tools for patrollers
- It is possible to view if a user has opted-in to view temporary account IPs via the User Info card, available in Preferences → Appearance → Advanced options →
Enable the user info card
- This feature also makes it possible for anyone to see the approximate count of temporary accounts active on the same IP address range.
- Special:IPContributions allows viewing all edits and temporary accounts connected to a specific IP address or IP range.
- Similarly, Special:GlobalContributions supports global search for a given temporary account's activity.
- The auto-reveal feature (see video below) allows users with the right permissions to automatically reveal all IP addresses for a limited time window.
Videos
-
How to use Special:IPContributions
-
How automatic IP reveal works
-
How to use IP Info
-
How to use User Info
Further information and discussion
- For more information and discussion regarding this change, please see the announcement from the Wikimedia Foundation at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Temporary accounts rollout.
Most of this message was written by Mz7 (source). Thanks, 🎃 SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 02:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)