User talk:Masem

Learning Resources v. Trump

Thanks for the note. Agreed that we shouldn’t interpret or “parse” legal arguments in Wikipedia’s voice—doing so runs afoul of WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. For clarity, though, WP:PRIMARY does allow limited use of primary sources like briefs to support simple, descriptive facts (e.g., who filed, when they filed, the exact words quoted), while analysis, significance, and characterization should come from independent secondary sources per WP:SECONDARY and WP:RS.

Proposed approach for this article:

* Keep cites to briefs only where they verify non-analytic facts: “On 3 March 2025, X filed an amicus brief” or a short, attributed quote from the brief, with a pin cite. See WP:V and WP:PRIMARY.
* Add/replace with reliable secondary coverage (e.g., law reviews, treatises, SCOTUSblog, major outlets) wherever we summarize or weigh arguments, to avoid WP:UNDUE and WP:OR.
* Avoid using party or amici filings to establish contested propositions of law or fact about living persons; use court opinions and high-quality secondary sources instead (see WP:BLP and WP:RS).

If you’re seeing places where a brief is being used for interpretation rather than straightforward verification, please flag with {{better source needed}} and we can swap in the appropriate secondary sources. This keeps the article precise (via the primary for “what/when/who/quoted text”) and neutral/encyclopedic (via secondary for “what it means/why it matters”).

IndyNotes (talk) 15:05, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are two problems. First is with amicus briefs, because we should not be picking and choosing ourselves which briefs to present as that otherwise is favoring sides. In the article, the lower court brief is included because third party sources highlighted it, and I know for other major cases, as we get closer to argue date, we'll see more sources likely outlining those briefs. Second is that broadly that even dissecting the basic arguments of any party's filing or brief is a matter of being knowledgeable in law, which purposely WP editors are not supposed to be. We rely on what other sources say and then summarize those. Now, if this is handled like the recent VRA case (and I see no doubt it will considered a high profile case), in the week ahead of the orals (that is, next week) we will see many sources come out with their analysis of their positions including major players in the amicus briefs. So this is more a situation to wait a bit more and sources will be there to help us summarize the arguments in the days ahead of the case, so we shouldn't try to get ahead of that. We have external links to the docket that a more curious reader can review to find these if they need yo see them. Masem (t) 15:31, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Yang Chen-Ning

On 23 October 2025, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Yang Chen-Ning, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. —Bagumba (talk) 07:17, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Overwatch 'commons' images

Just stating for the record I have some trepidation about using images from that trailer, especially given the Brazilian Overwatch account's upload isn't under a free license. Even the main US upload lacks the free license. Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:20, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't like the idea that material that is clearly copyright in most countries, but posted by an office outlet in a different language is claimed to be CC. The page that is linked on the version of the trailer on Commons [1] does have the CC text on it, but not the version you have linked fro the OW brazil community. Masem (t) 17:31, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kung Fu Man: I've raised the question over at the commons village pump on copyright questions. Masem (t) 19:29, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AeroRoutes on WP:RSN

I have started a new discussion on whether Aeroroutes is a reliable source, if you wanna join the discussion to mention on if its a reliable source feel free to do so, the discussion is at WP:RSN#WP:AEROROUTES Metrosfan (talk) 07:04, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peanuts

Hello. While I'm still working on trying to get Emily Neves up to B-class or GA-class as per the ongoing discussion at Talk:Emily Neves#B-class/GA-class efforts, can you please take a look at Talk:Peanuts#GA/FA? and Talk:Charles M. Schulz#GA/FA plans, if you are interested in joining these discussions? I'm planning on on getting the Peanuts and Charles M. Schulz articles up for GA or FA in the future. Thanks, sjones23 (talk - contributions) 07:18, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga § Voice actor GA/FA drive?

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga § Voice actor GA/FA drive?. sjones23 (talk - contributions) 13:43, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Guide to temporary accounts

Hello, Masem. 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?

Editing from a temporary account

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

How to enable IP Reveal

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)[reply]