This page has archives.Topics inactive for 60 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot IIIif there are more than 5.
Before posting a message here please consider if this is the correct venue. If you wish to discuss me (SSSB), my edits (read the second paragragh if you have an issue with an edit request I implemented) or you wish to bring my attention to a certain matter, this is the correct venue (there are other cases where this is the correct venue).
However, this is not the correct venue to make edit requests. These requests should be made on the talk page of the page which you would like to be edited, if you request an edit on a page in which I have an interest it will appear on my watchlist, I will see it. If you have a problem with an edit request I implemented, please consider if it might not be better to respond where the edit request was made (you may use {{ping}} or {{u}} to attract my attention). Thank you, SSSB (talk)
A dates error. References show this error when one of the date-containing parameters is incorrectly formatted. Please edit the article to correct the date and ensure it is formatted to follow the Wikipedia Manual of Style's guidance on dates. (Fix | Ask for help)
Following a motion, the GSCASTE extended-confirmed restriction in the Indian military history case has been narrowed. It now applies to caste-related topics in South Asia, and the preemptive protection remedy has been amended accordingly.
Changes to user permissions made from Meta are now included in the local user permissions log (T6055).
The autoconfirmed user group will soon be modified such that the four-day account age requirement begins when an account makes its first edit (T418484).
Arbitration
The arbitration case SchroCat has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case closed on 15 April.
Per a recent motion, appeals of blocks from the conflict-of-interest VRT queue are, by default, appealed on-wiki through the normal unblock process. However, they may be heard by the Committee if COIVRTers disagree on the interpretation of the evidence or believe ArbCom would be better suited to hear the appeal. Administrators are also advised that loosening or lifting such blocks without the consent of someone with access to the queue or ArbCom can be grounds for desysopping.
Per a recent motion, restrictions issued directly by the Committee may now be enforced with blocks which work exactly like contentious topic blocks.
