User talk:MarcoAurelio/Archives/2020-02

Add topic
Active discussions

Tech News: 2020-06

20:05, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:51, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

Growth team updates #12

17:39, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 17:25, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Links in edit summaries

Just FYI: in edit summaries like this, it would be helpful to readers if you could create a live wikilink instead of just pasting in a bare URL, which does not get autolinked in an edit summary. In this particular case, you would have used:

Add as 'regiowiki' per [[Special:PermanentLink/]]

- dcljr (talk) 01:51, 6 February 2020 (UTC)


I see you're asking to be confirmed again for Steward. Good luck with that (seems to be going well so far). This is too small a deal to post there but also has bothered me for long enough that I wanted to take the opportuntity to write something. Meta:Requests for adminship/TonyBallioni really bothered me as I felt my decision to participate in that RfA was ignored based on a standard that I could not have known about beforehand. I understand that the standard was done to try and be fair to Tony. However, on other wikis when there is a standard like that it is written out so people can know ahead of time. If the standard had been written out I would not have bothered participating - no hard feelings. But instead I really took time to craft a thoughtful message in that process only to find out after the fact that I shouldn't have because my voice wasn't welcome. Even typing this now I'm getting agitated. As I wrote at the start, I have no doubt that you're an excellent steward and deserve to be reconfirmed but I wanted to let you know the impact that this had on me. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:02, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Barkeep49. I feel you. My homewiki, the Spanish Wikipedia, has clear voting rules known beforehand. I have been trying to establish clearer rules for voting on Meta-Wiki local affairs for some time already, but people around here have historically thought that it was unneeded bureaucracy; and for the most cases I concede it'd be as most votes on Meta either clearly pass or clearly don't pass. I'm however of the opinion that we should always be prepared for the unexpected, although it looks I'm alone in that regard. In the case of Tony's RfA, your voice was counted as everyone else was. No vote was discounted from the RfA. Like I said in the bureaucrat chat, the RfA didn't managed to get at least 75% of support required to pass. When I said "If I even go ahead and discount votes" I was talking in a conditional, hypotetical situation; because no votes where finally discounted. I am sorry if my language was not clear back in the days, and you felt unwelcome. I hope this clarifies this a bit. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 18:37, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

IRC bot

It may be a bit late now, but I just noticed this page indicating there's an IRC bot written in Python that appears to be broken. If no one else has, I will offer to review the code and see if it can be brought up to speed. Or build a replacement, which ever is easier. Operator873talkconnect 23:59, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Operator873. Thanks for your message and offering. We found a replacement using Wm-bot, which covers the tasks from our former bot and has some other nice functionalities as well. Best regards, —MarcoAurelio (talk) 12:08, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Tech News: 2020-07

19:12, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:19, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Tech News: 2020-08

16:17, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: —MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:20, 17 February 2020 (UTC)


Check your inbox :) TonyBallioni (talk) 18:36, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

Got it. Reviewing. —MarcoAurelio (talk) 21:23, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "MarcoAurelio/Archives/2020-02".