Justlettersandnumbers (talk | contribs) Choice? |
Ad Orientem (talk | contribs) →Blocked IP: Reply Tag: Reply |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Administrator topicon}} |
{{Administrator topicon}} |
||
{{tmbox | text = <span style="color:red;">'''Welcome! Please read this before posting here'''.</span> |
|||
{{tmbox| text = <span style="color:red;">'''<big><big>Welcome! Please read this before posting here.</big></big>'''</span> |
|||
*If you have a problem or need help with something please leave a message. However if your issue does not involve me personally or is time sensitive/urgent you may wish to request help on one of our [[WP:PNBD|noticeboards]]. |
|||
*If I left you a message on your user talk page or elsewhere, please respond there. If you leave me a message here, this is where I will normally respond. If you want to alert me to your message, you may [[WP:MENTION|ping]] me. (It is not necessary to ping me when leaving messages on my talk page as I am automatically alerted by email.) |
|||
*If you have a problem or need help with something please leave a message. However, if your issue does not involve me personally, or is time sensitive/urgent, you may wish to request help on one of our [[WP:PNBD|noticeboards]]. |
|||
*If you are here because you think I made a mistake somewhere, ''YOU COULD BE RIGHT''! I am neither omniscient nor infallible. Let's talk about it. |
*If you are here because you think I made a mistake somewhere, ''YOU COULD BE RIGHT''! I am neither omniscient nor infallible. Let's talk about it. |
||
*Please be polite and remember to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]]. Also check the potty language at the door. I don't talk to other people that way and I expect the same courtesy in return. |
*Please be polite and remember to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]]. Also check the potty language at the door. I don't talk to other people that way and I expect the same courtesy in return. |
||
*While minor editing is fine, for the sake of continuity of records please don't delete comments on my talk page even if you later conclude you were wrong. If you want to retract a comment, just add a note or you can <s>strike out the text</s>. |
*While minor editing is fine, for the sake of continuity of records please don't delete comments on my talk page even if you later conclude you were wrong. If you want to retract a comment, just add a note or you can <s>strike out the text</s>. |
||
*'''Private emails''' are welcome. However, in the interest of transparency; requests for administrator actions should generally be made openly either here or on the relevant noticeboard/talk page discussion. Exceptions where commonsense or policy/guidelines may require discretion, are understood. |
|||
*<u>'''Special note to admins'''</u>: If you think I muffed something feel free to revert or otherwise fix it. Just kindly leave a note. Also administrators and other experienced editors should feel free to respond to any queries on this page, especially if the message has been sitting for a while without a response. |
|||
*<u>'''Special note to admins'''</u>: If you think I muffed something feel free to revert or otherwise fix it. Just kindly leave a note. |
|||
*Experienced editors are free to respond to any queries on this page, especially if the message has been sitting for a while without a response. |
|||
*Lastly, I'm a part-timer, so bear with me if I don't get back to you instantly. |
*Lastly, I'm a part-timer, so bear with me if I don't get back to you instantly. |
||
If you have questions comments or concerns feel free to drop me a line below. Please post new topics at the bottom of this page, and remember to sign your |
If you have questions comments or concerns feel free to drop me a line below. Please post new topics at the bottom of this page, and remember to sign your message with four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>). |
||
<span style="color:green;">[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title={{TALKPAGENAMEE}}&action=edit§ion=new Click here to start a new topic.]</span> |
<span style="color:green;">[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title={{TALKPAGENAMEE}}&action=edit§ion=new Click here to start a new topic.]</span> |
||
<br>}} |
<br>}} |
||
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis |
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis |
||
| age=336 |
|||
|archiveprefix=User talk:Ad Orientem/Archive |
|||
| archiveprefix=User talk:Ad Orientem/Archive |
|||
|format= %%i |
|||
| numberstart=1 |
|||
|age=240 |
|||
|maxarchsize= |
| maxarchsize=75000 |
||
| header={{Automatic archive navigator}} |
|||
|numberstart=1 |
|||
| minkeepthreads=5 |
|||
|archivebox=yes |
|||
| minarchthreads=2 |
|||
|box-advert=yes |
|||
| format= %%i |
|||
}} |
}} |
||
{{Archives}} |
|||
== A |
== A barnstar for you! == |
||
Welcome back from your vacation, AO! I would like to establish a new subject on the [[Southern aristocracy]], but the page currently redirects to [[Plantations in the American South]]. How does one go about this? Am I to delete the redirect and begin contributing, or does the current page need deleting before the page can be used for content? – [[User:Conservatrix|Conservatrix]] ([[User talk:Conservatrix|talk]]) 06:44, 11 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Though reliable sources often employ the term "aristocracy," I could alternatively use [[Planter class]] to avoid its pointed nature. – [[User:Conservatrix|Conservatrix]] ([[User talk:Conservatrix|talk]]) 07:27, 11 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Good morning {{u|Conservatrix}}. <s>I suggest you that propose the redirect for deletion ([[WP:PROD]]}. If no one objects the redirect will be deleted in seven days.</s> The redirect has no substantial history of editing so I don't think it will be controversial. Just explain you want to create an article with that title. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 12:59, 11 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::Ack. I just noticed that PROD can't be used with redirects which seems odd. Send it to RfD or nominate it for CSD (G6). -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 13:03, 11 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Ah! I near forgot! Had you noticed that our muse, the Mad Monarchist, has left his writing for new adventures? – [[User:Conservatrix|Conservatrix]] ([[User talk:Conservatrix|talk]]) 08:43, 14 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Sadly I had. :-( -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 14:43, 14 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
That CSD (G6) is done. – [[User:Conservatrix|Conservatrix]] ([[User talk:Conservatrix|talk]]) 22:02, 21 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:@{{u|Conservatrix}} {{done}} -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 22:21, 21 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::Cannot describe how excited I am to have this published! Thank you. – [[User:Conservatrix|Conservatrix]] ([[User talk:Conservatrix|talk]]) 00:22, 22 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::I am glad your draft is up. However I note a rather glaring lack of references... I'd make that a priority item. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 00:31, 22 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Can we use [[Template:Cite thesis]] to credit unpublished manuscripts? Are manuscript citations allowed? – [[User:Conservatrix|Conservatrix]] ([[User talk:Conservatrix|talk]]) 01:33, 28 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:A thesis or dissertation that has been accepted by an accredited university or college is typically regarded as a reliable source. If by unpublished you mean that you can't establish it's acceptance by a degree granting institution then I don't think that would fly. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 01:45, 28 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::The subject is a typed manuscript procured from the LSU Department of Special Collections. Available for duplication w/ fee to any member of the public, the manuscript has been cited as a source for several published works. Does the University's ownership legitimize it? – [[User:Conservatrix|Conservatrix]] ([[User talk:Conservatrix|talk]]) 05:44, 28 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::Absent more details I can't express an informed opinion. But even if I did have one, I would encourage you to ask this question at [[WP:RSN]]. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 05:50, 28 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Disruptive editing at [[Love Story (Yelawolf album)]] == |
|||
Disruptive editing at the article by IPs – probably the same person using various IPs: 109.161.146.252, 94.76.21.51, 109.161.172.33, 62.209.14.226 and 109.161.146.179. This editor keeps adding incorrect information by changing the date of the certification without explaining why. For example, in the RIAA database, it says June 8 not June 20. [[User:TheAmazingPeanuts|TheAmazingPeanuts]] ([[User talk:TheAmazingPeanuts|talk]]) 16:56, 21 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Looks like {{u|Muboshgu}} just protected the page. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 21:59, 21 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::Indeed I did. It was at [[WP:RFPP]]. – [[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]] ([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 22:02, 21 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::[[User:TheAmazingPeanuts|TheAmazingPeanuts]]... odd. I just got your message a few minutes ago and the page history shows you posted it at 21:56. But the time stamp says 16:56. I've never seen that before. @{{u|Muboshgu}} thanks for jumping on that. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 22:06, 21 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::Same time from different time zones? – [[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]] ([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 22:12, 21 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Maybe, but I always thought time stamps on Wikipedia are supposed to be standardized. We are all on Wikipedia standard time (i.e. GMT). -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 22:13, 21 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::::I live in Central America, so my timeline is different than yours. [[User:TheAmazingPeanuts|TheAmazingPeanuts]] ([[User talk:TheAmazingPeanuts|talk]]) 17:17, 21 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Ahhhh. I still don't get it lol. I am in the Eastern US Time Zone but my time stamp reflects GMT. Oh well. I'm not losing sleep over it. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 22:19, 21 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Editor with various usernames == |
|||
{{atop|result=The discussion at the lower part of this thread seems to have run its useful course and I think it is time to close and move on. {{u|Sebastian James}} is cautioned to be more careful in their editing and to take due notice of the opinions of other experienced editors. You don't have to always agree with your fellow editors, but if more than one is telling you that you are wrong, you need to be very careful before ignoring their advice. Doing so regularly can be seen as disruptive. If you still believe you are right then seek opinions from other uninvolved experienced editors before proceeding. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 22:15, 24 June 2018 (UTC)}} |
|||
Hi AO, can you maybe ask Bbb23 to run a CheckUser on a series of rather annoying editors? One is {{noping|Clovaspark9}}, another is {{noping|Margiela Yakimono}}, and I believe there have been a number of other (all registered accounts with red usernames) connected, but I have forgotten what these are (hence why CheckUser may be helpful). They update charts, often supplying unreliable ones, and continue adding/restoring these even after having it explained to them that said charts are on [[WP:BADCHARTS]] or are single-network charts ([[WP:SINGLENETWORK]]). Clovaspark9 is also another editor who never responds to talk page messages to supply accurate accessdates (of course, this is not a blockable offence in and of itself). Clovaspark9 also often updates the same charts Margiela Yakimono does, so it's quite suspect. Thanks. <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 17:26, 22 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Ping {{u|Bbb23}}. Ss112 is one of our top editors in music related subjects and in my experience he has a good nose for socks. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 17:44, 22 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::The two users are {{unrelated}}.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 18:26, 22 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::Ok. Thanks for having a look. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 18:29, 22 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::Oh, the other user I forgot was Moviefan49. I'm quite sure this user is connected to one of the above two, but I get that after this my word might not be so trusted... <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 07:00, 23 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Also AO, while I'm here, can you please have a word to the user Sebastian James? They've been edit warring the past few days on [[Utopia (Björk album)]], [[? (XXXTentacion album)]] ''and'' [[17 (XXXTentacion album)]]. I believe I told you about them in the past. They're big on the snark and disruptive editing to get their way. They've been adding unreliable reviews (listed at [[WP:ALBUMAVOID]]) on XXXTentacion's albums and summarising critical consensus when it's not sourced (against [[WP:SYNTH]]) and still aren't getting it even after having it explained to them. Honestly, I don't think a block would be too much at this stage (but that's my opinion). On the Björk article they have been removing a critical aggregation site despite its acceptance as a source on Wikipedia. <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 07:02, 23 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:I didn't know about The Needle Drop thing (his reviews count when covered by another sources). [[Sputnikmusic]] is not an unreliable source. You are the one who adds dubious sources of reliability that don't have any article on Wikipedia. AOTY shows reviews with green/yellow and red instead of positive/mixed and negative. On the Björk article, a user tried to add [[AnyDecentMusic?]], a review aggregator that has been problematic with notability since December 2012. It will be better for you if you act politely to other users, including me, because you are in the wrong. [[User:Sebastian James|Sebastian James]] ([[User talk:Sebastian James|talk]]) |
|||
::{{u|Ss112}} & {{u|Sebastian James}}- I think a lot of this can be classified as a content dispute which should be handled in the normal manner and does not require administrator intervention. In any event the subject matter is outside my competency so I am not going to get involved in sorting those issues out. To the extent that there has been multiple reverting... don't do that. Also please remember that we are all on the same team here. We want a better encyclopedia. There is no need to be short with one another. Thank you both for your many contributions to the project. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 17:51, 23 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{ping|Sebastian James}} Take a look at [[Template_talk:Album_ratings#Add_AnyDecentMusic?_to_aggregate_reviewers_option?|this]]. Most of the editors supported AnyDecentMusic? should be added in the album rating template, just because you don't agreed with the website doesn't mean you have to removed it, especially in the [[Utopia (Björk album)]] article. [[User:TheAmazingPeanuts|TheAmazingPeanuts]] ([[User talk:TheAmazingPeanuts|talk]]) 14:50, 23 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{ping|Sebastian James}} Oh, in response to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sebastian_James&diff=prev&oldid=847196080 this]...''when'' did you report me the first time? You didn't. So by all means, please report me to an admin for my "unkindness" in what I thought was a perfectly justified message due to your behaviour, ''especially'' when multiple editors tried to explain this to you and you reverted them all. I didn't say Sputnikmusic was reliable; I said "user reviews from Sputnikmusic are unreliable", which if you had read [[WP:ALBUMAVOID]] you would know (they are distinguished by "USER" in caps next to the author's name). Aside from my restoring two legitimate sources to ''17'' (pulse.ng, a Nigerian news source, and ''Salute Mag''), you have no real experience in what sources I do and don't add to articles, so please by all means point out where else I have added "dubious sources of reliability" (which doesn't make a lot of sense, by the way). Also, music reviewers don't need to have articles here to be considered reliable. I think you're confusing ''notability'' to have an article made for them and ''reliability'' as a source. Sebastian, meanwhile, has a year-long history of removing sources without explanation and ADM scores simply because [[WP:IDON'TLIKEIT]]. They did this half a year ago at a Björk article and they're ''still'' edit warring at several Björk articles (with other editors, mind you, so AO, I'm not really involved in this) to remove ADM scores despite the fact, as TheAmazingPeanuts pointed out, they are considred suitable for inclusion by the wider Wikipedia music community. <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 21:03, 23 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:{{ping|TheAmazingPeanuts}} '''just because you don't agreed with the website doesn't mean you have to removed it,''' I have never mentioned that I "don't agreed" with the website. If you had looked ADM?'s page, you would have seen the template that has been staying there since 2012. I have done the reverts because of this. You should mention this on the article's talk page, because [[Template_talk:Album_ratings#Add_AnyDecentMusic?_to_aggregate_reviewers_option?|this thing]] is hard to find. (I also checked Utopia's talk page and there had been no consensus.) [[User:Sebastian James|Sebastian James]] ([[User talk:Sebastian James|talk]]) |
|||
:I was pointing out your sentence ('''They've been adding unreliable reviews''') when I mentioned Sputnikmusic, because I have only added one unreliable review (it may be two if you are gonna insist to add The Needle Drop). |
|||
:'''music reviewers don't need to have articles here to be considered reliable''': Again, I added this as an extra thing, you did understand it wrongly. |
|||
:'''Sebastian, meanwhile, has a year-long history of removing sources without explanation and ADM scores simply because [[WP:IDON'TLIKEIT]].''': I have already explained this, it is not a personal thing. |
|||
:'''They did this half a year ago at a Björk article and they're ''still'' edit warring at several Björk articles''': The last edit I have done to a Björk article was ADM? score on Utopia. Previous edit was [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bj%C3%B6rk&oldid=845750065 this], as you can see I mostly explain when I revert, or if the edit really needs an explanation. So stop informing incorrect things about me. I have edited many music articles, not only the ones about Björk. So, Ss112, remember that your perception can be wrong. If the other person is writing in an unfamiliar language, or has a different cultural background, you may misunderstand their intentions. Being right about an issue does not mean you're behaving properly. Last but not least, don't try to persuade people of things that aren't true. [[User:Sebastian James|Sebastian James]] ([[User talk:Sebastian James|talk]]) |
|||
::{{ping|Sebastian James}} There is nothing with [http://www.anydecentmusic.com/review/9054/Bjork-Utopia.aspx this] bring added in the [[Utopia (Björk album)]] article, stop edit warring with other editors who have more experience in Wikipedia then you. You clearly don't fully understand how it works here, [[User:Ss112|Ss112]] already pointed it out to you. [[User:TheAmazingPeanuts|TheAmazingPeanuts]] ([[User talk:TheAmazingPeanuts|talk]]) 11:58, 24 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:{{ping|TheAmazingPeanuts}} ''You'' clearly have no intention to understand, and probably haven't read my reply properly. You don't and will never know who is experienced more "'''then'''" the other. Stop being salty, and mind your own business. [[User:Sebastian James|Sebastian James]] ([[User talk:Sebastian James|talk]]) |
|||
::[[User:Sebastian James|Sebastian James]] the well being of the project is the business of every editor. That part of your comment was not helpful. I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that this may need to be sent over to [[WP:DRN]] or possibly even ANI. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 18:39, 24 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
{{abot}} |
|||
== [[Anurag Arora]] == |
|||
I added some references to [[Anurag Arora]] and added a heading for the list of roles. I think he might be notable. You might want to revisit [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anurag Arora]] <b style="font-family: Times;">[[User:Eastmain|Eastmain]] ([[User talk:Eastmain|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Eastmain|contribs]])</b> 01:47, 23 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Thank you. I have replied at the AfD discussion. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 02:10, 23 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== deleted bruce milne entry == |
|||
hi ad orientum |
|||
i posted the comprehensive entry on Bruce Milne that you have just deleted. i am not a fervent wiki contributor but an aust music biz insider who likes to correct things when they strike me as egregiously wrong. (this happened when i tried to correct the entry Aust Pub Rock which was so plain wrong it was just a joke, but my corrections/expensions were removed too and at that time i had neither the time now inclination to re-correct. but in this instance...) the entry on Bruce Milne as far as i could tell did what wiki asked - i.e., insert references. it is full of references. i don't think i need to try and justify the article, as opposed to being pulled down because it's advertising or promotion, the article justified itself in its content and the several dozen references present, i have vested interest in this living person and so i can't understand why the biography has been pulled down. i think the deletion is an error the same as the removal of my rewrite of the Aus Pub Rock entry, which is an appalling mistake. i'll take the trouble now i'm thinking about it to add something to that pub rock talk page, if this is the right way, i hope, for me to be making these asks, with thanks [[User:Flamippo|Flamippo]] ([[User talk:Flamippo|talk]]) 01:11, 24 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Hi [[User:Flamippo|Flamippo]]. I have taken a second look and I am afraid I stand by the deletion. It clearly was a specie of unambiguous promotion of the subject. I also spot checked the references, and almost all of the ones I looked at likely fail [[WP:RS]]. I have not [[WP:SALT|salted]] the article so you are free to try again. However if you do, please be careful about the language you use which cannot contain peacock phrases or adjectives that serve only to promote the subject. Also you are going to need better references in order to establish the [[WP:N|notability]] of the subject. Please see WP:RS and [[WP:BASIC]]. You should also read [[WP:COI]] as you have stated you have a connection to the subject. Alternatively you may appeal the deletion at [[WP:DRV]]. As an experienced editor I would advise you that in my opinion such an appeal will not succeed. Best regards... -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 01:43, 24 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
hi ad. thanks for this. i think i get it. a lot less declamatory, just the facts. so okay, i'll give it another run through at some point in the near future when i've got time. although i do think the references are every bit as credible as references i see in other wiki pages. thing is, i could have cited published books in which this subject is discussed but wasn't sure how to cite books without a URL. but i've run out of time on this for the meantime, with thanks [[User:Flamippo|Flamippo]] ([[User talk:Flamippo|talk]]) 21:22, 24 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
oh and the other thing was, it was just an unfortunate typo that it read i have vested interests, it should have read i have NO vested interests [[User:Flamippo|Flamippo]] ([[User talk:Flamippo|talk]]) 21:23, 24 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Request for Undeletion Article [[Sunteck Realty]] == |
|||
Hi, I would request to undelete the Wikipedia page [[Sunteck Realty]], because It passes Wikipedia's notability guidelines under [[WP:NCORP]], [[WP:LISTED]] and [[WP:GNG]]. |
|||
The article was well referenced, verifiable and complying the Wikipedia's Policy. It would be unfair to delete under Speedy delete. If you still believe that the article is not Notable, I would say Article for deletion process would be best way to reach any consensus.Thank you.--[[User:Eramritasharma|Eramritasharma]] ([[User talk:Eramritasharma|talk]]) 15:32, 24 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:{{done}}. After reviewing the references more closely I agree that there is enough independent RS coverage to make a plausible argument that the subject now passes NCORP. Courtesy ping {{u|SamHolt6}}. If doubts remain AfD is the best place to resolve them. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 15:55, 24 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Disruptive editing again == |
|||
*{{user|116.45.140.21}} You have blocked this editor in March [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A116.45.140.21&type=revision&diff=832369040&oldid=832366940] and last month [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A116.45.140.21&type=revision&diff=842215263&oldid=842199073] for adding content without sources, the editor is still once again doing the same thing, especially in the [[Damn (Kendrick Lamar album)]] article. Like just recently [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Views_%28album%29&type=revision&diff=841796781&oldid=841154429]. [[User:TheAmazingPeanuts|TheAmazingPeanuts]] ([[User talk:TheAmazingPeanuts|talk]]) 03:14, 25 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::Final warning issued. If this continues let me know and I will drop the hammer (again). -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 14:33, 25 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Fhsig13 == |
|||
Thanks for the warning on his talk. Any chance you'd take a look at the report he just made at ANEW? Thanks. [[User:John from Idegon|John from Idegon]] ([[User talk:John from Idegon|talk]]) 00:38, 26 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:I have declined the report, for now. I will comment further on his talk page. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 01:00, 26 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
{{ec}}:Thanks again. Any possibility you'd try to explain BRD to him? If you read his emotional responses in his talk, you'll see clearly he's not grasping some very basic notions, such as OR. He's also apparently pretty blinded by COI as his talk page makes clear. There's been a history of "be true to my school" editing on this article, and at least one other school article regular, Meters, is aware of it. I'm just gonna piss this dude off further, so I'm not gonna do anything for at least a day. Hopefully Meters will pick it up later. Have a good morning or evening or whatever it is where you are. [[User:John from Idegon|John from Idegon]] ([[User talk:John from Idegon|talk]]) 01:08, 26 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::He is clearly a newer editor who is not yet familiar with all of WP:PAG. Sometimes you need to gently walk them through things. Posting warning templates for mistakes that were almost certainly made in good faith might not be helpful. I will post a few links for their benefit. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 01:16, 26 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::Ok I think we managed to sort this out w/o a trip to ANI or anyone getting blocked. I am going to go smoke a cigar. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 02:26, 26 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::Ping {{u|John from Idegon}} |
|||
== [[User:Fhsig13/Thomas Green (Baseball Player)]] == |
|||
Hey, I know you userfied this in trying to help me, but it's actually causing more harm. People are threatening to request speedy deletes on it, and I'm getting hammered on because the image that was on it when it was in the mainspace was non-free use uploaded. If you unuserfy it, I'd really appreciate it, as it was a viable article beforehand, and I've added to it since, so I'd much prefer it as it was, given that I was harrassed for it before. THis is only one of many times I've gotten this kind of treatment since joining Wikipedia, and I'm almost at the point of quitting. Please help. Thanks, [[User:Fhsig13|Fhsig13]] ([[User talk:Fhsig13|talk]]) 04:51, 26 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:It's already been userfied and it should not be deleted unless you request it. The image is a different story. Copyright is something we take super seriously and unless you can pass muster there it is going to get deleted. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 04:56, 26 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anurag Arora|CSD 15]] == |
|||
I think it is an interesting suggestion, though I am not too sure that the community would be open to it. Perhaps worth an RfC some day? --[[User:TheSandDoctor|<span style="color:#FF9933; font-weight:bold; font-family:monotype;">The</span><span style="color:#009933; font-weight:bold;">SandDoctor</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:TheSandDoctor|<span style="color:#009933;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 01:20, 28 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Possibly but I am doubtful that the community would be prepared to give that kind of discretion to admins. All of the other CSD criteria is written in very narrow language. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 01:28, 28 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Deb Haaland == |
|||
I've been noticing that as well, though I'm not sure it's as sudden as you seem to think — so far, this entire year has been an unprecedented barrage of pushback against [[WP:NPOL]]. A lot more candidates are trying to get Wikipedia articles than usual (I don't remember even 2016 being this bad!), and a lot more editors than ever are trying to drown the notion that campaign coverage in and of itself shouldn't be enough to get a person over [[WP:GNG]]. Try pointing out that ''every'' candidate ''always'' gets enough coverage to technically pass GNG if campaign coverage itself were automatically enough to pass GNG in and of itself, or try pointing out that Wikipedia's standard is the [[WP:10YT|ten-year test]] for ''permanent'' significance and not the [[WP:NOTNEWS|every single person who happens to get into the news today]] test, and people just stick their fingers in their ears and repeat that their candidate has enough campaign coverage to clear GNG — and try raising [[WP:BLP1E]], and you get the response that an election is somehow not an event. Which, er, yes, it is. |
|||
It's tiresome, and I'm extremely fed up with it — if we don't hold "candidates do not get to use Wikipedia as a platform for their campaign brochures" as ''the'' bright red line that NPOL ''does not'' erase, then we may as well just fold up. Our value as a project depends on having ''standards'' for how a person becomes notable enough to get in here, and what their article has to look and sound like, and how it has to be referenced — without those, we're just Ballotpedia x LinkedIn, not a proper encyclopedia anymore. But what to do about it, I simply don't know. [[User:Bearcat|Bearcat]] ([[User talk:Bearcat|talk]]) 05:15, 28 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:@{{u|Bearcat}} I agree with pretty much everything you wrote. Perhaps we need to open a discussion of this issue somewhere. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 05:20, 28 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Block == |
|||
Hi can you please block {{u|IHateWalter666}} and {{u|Fuckwalter}}? The former one is vandalising [[Walter Bustamante]] and the latter one is a sock I suppose. <nowiki>~</nowiki> [[User:Abelmoschus Esculentus|<span style="background:#008000; color:white; padding:2px;">'''Abelmoschus Esculentus'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Abelmoschus Esculentus|talk to me]]) 05:53, 28 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:{{done}} First one blocked by {{u|Anachronist}} (what an awesome user name) and I got the 2nd one. FYI I am off to bed so if there are anymore issues of this sort please report them at [[WP:AIV]]. Thanks for your great work and good night. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 06:01, 28 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Re: Some friendly advice == |
|||
I never said nor hinted that editors should be penalized, that I my edits are not neutral, nor that I have an agenda (as does the "Sovereign citizen movement" page). The data I provided is backed by the stated sources - current law, .... I have said over and over that, as you said, "Sovereign citizens lacks balance or fails". Content disputes by majority vote do NOT change the information to a truth. Majority rules does not = reality. My political views are not the subject nor have I given any. The "other side" of the sovereign citizen is all I provided backed by actual current law (see below). Nothing "odd" here except the emotional and exaggerated responses to my evidence and comments. |
|||
{{collapse top|Long List}} |
|||
# Preamble to the U.S.A. Constitution |
|||
# ww.patriotnetwork.info/ |
|||
# The American’s Creed |
|||
# The Red Amendment by L. B. Bork, mostly on page 4-9 |
|||
# Declaration of Independence 1776 |
|||
# Bouvier’s Law Dictionary 1856 |
|||
# https ://dictionary.law.com |
|||
# https ://definitions.uslegal.com/m/malum-in-se/ |
|||
# https ://www.jstor.org/stable/1109251?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents |
|||
# Federalist Papers 78, 81, 82, 83 |
|||
# http ://www.constitutiondecoded.com/us-constitution-article-iii.html |
|||
# https: //definitions.uslegal.com/d/de-jure-government-and-de-facto-government/ |
|||
# Black’s Law Dictionary at https ://thelawdictionary.org/de-jure-government/ |
|||
# The Oxford Dictionaries |
|||
# http s://www.dailyrepublic.com/all-dr-news/opinion/local-opinion-columnists/laws-rules-regulations-serve-to-control-people/ |
|||
# Article VI of the U.S.A. Constitution. |
|||
# Amendment 10 of the U.S.A. Constitution. |
|||
# James Madison, father of the constitution, in Federalist Paper 45. |
|||
# Alexander. Hamilton, Federalist Paper 22. |
|||
# Stephen Moore https ://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/our-unconstitutional-congress/ |
|||
# Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, page 241. |
|||
# https ://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/usurp |
|||
# https ://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lobbyist |
|||
# Statute at Large 2/21/1871. Also United States Code title 28, section 3002 (15). |
|||
# Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945) https ://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/324/652/case.html |
|||
# Statutes at Large, July 27, 1868. |
|||
# The Red Amendment by L. B. Bork |
|||
# From the U.S.A. government Style Manual, chapters 5.22 and 5.23 |
|||
# U.S.C. title 8, section 1101 (a)(21). |
|||
# https ://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/state |
|||
# U.S.C. title 8, section 1101(a)(22). |
|||
# U.S.C. title 28, section 3002 (15). |
|||
# U.S.C. title 26, section 7701 (a)(1). Also U.S.C. title 28, section 3002 (10); Administrative Procedures, title 14, Chapter 1, sec. 1001, 10; and many other places that have the same or similar definitions. |
|||
# Arizona Revised Statutes 14-10103 11. |
|||
# Colorado Revised Statutes 13-1.5-102 and elsewhere. |
|||
# ww.famguardian.org , ww.patriotnetwork.info/ , ww.livefreenow.org, www .1215.org , and www .barefootsworld.net |
|||
# Cracking the Code by Peter Eric Hendrickson, The UCC Connection: How To Free Yourself From Legal Tyranny by David E. Robinsonand, and others. |
|||
# https ://www.scribd.com/document/82236209/Act-of-State-Generic and else where |
|||
# https ://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sovereign |
|||
# James Madison in Federalist Paper 19 |
|||
# Yick Wo v. Hopkins 118 U.S. 356. https ://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/118/356 |
|||
# Chisholm vs. Georgia, 2 Dall 419, 471; Penhallow vs. Doane’s Administrators, 3 Dall 54, 93; McCullock vs. Maryland, 4 Wheat 316, 404, 405. |
|||
# Colorado Constitution, article II, section 2 |
|||
# North Carolina State Constitution, article I, section 2 - https ://www.ncleg.net/Legislation/constitution/ncconstitution.html |
|||
# California Government Code, sections 100, 11120 and 54950 |
|||
# https ://www.nationallibertyalliance.org/sites/default/files/Articles%20of%20Freedom.pdf |
|||
# James Madison in Federalist Paper 37 |
|||
# California Constitution (1879), article I, section 1 |
|||
# California Constitution (1879), article II, section 1 |
|||
# Colorado Constitution, article II, section 1. |
|||
# Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Paper 16. |
|||
# Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137, 1 Cond. Rep. 267 |
|||
# Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 78 |
|||
# 16th American Jurisprudence 2d, Sec. 178 http ://www.constitution.org/uslaw/16amjur2nd.htm |
|||
# 16th American Jurisprudence, 2nd Edition, Volume 16, Section 177 |
|||
# Mr. Justice Brewer, U.S. Supreme Court, [South Carolina vs. US, 199 U.S. 437 (1905) |
|||
# Miller vs. U.S., U.S. Supreme Court, [319 U.S. 105 (1943) |
|||
# Law maxim and The Federal Register – https ://www.archives.gov/federal-register/laws/administrative-procedure/556.html. |
|||
# http ://legaldictionary.lawin.org/actori-incumbit-probatio/) and U.S.C. title 5, section 556 (d) |
|||
# Statute at Large I, chapter I, section 1, June 1, 1789. Oaths are also stated in state constitutions. For example, article XX, section 3 of the Constitution of California. |
|||
{{collapse bottom}} |
|||
<!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Rgojoey|Rgojoey]] ([[User talk:Rgojoey#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Rgojoey|contribs]]) 21:42, 29 June 2018 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:{{u|Rgojoey}} please read [[WP:TRUTH]]. Best regards... -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 22:56, 29 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::{{tps}} What, you don't think patriotnetwork.info is a trustworthy source? /s [[User:Clpo13|clpo13]]<sub>([[User_talk:Clpo13|talk]])</sub> 23:19, 29 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::Well, given my own political inclinations... oh never mind. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 23:23, 29 June 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== ''The Signpost'': 29 June 2018 == |
|||
<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;"> {{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2018-06-29}} </div><!--Volume 14, Issue 07--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * '''[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost|Read this Signpost in full]]''' * [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2018-06-29|Single-page]] * [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe|Unsubscribe]] * [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 01:29, 30 June 2018 (UTC) </div></div> |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:Chris troutman@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=847582739 --> |
|||
== ITN recognition for [[Gudrun Burwitz]] == |
|||
{{ivmbox |
|||
|1=On 2 July 2018, '''''[[:Template:In the news|In the news]]''''' was updated with an item that involved the article '''''[[Gudrun Burwitz]]''''', which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the [[Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates|candidates page]]. [[User:Stephen|Step]][[User talk:Stephen|hen]] 04:23, 2 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
|2=Gnome globe current event.svg |
|||
|imagesize=50px |
|||
}} |
|||
== Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Lee (artist) == |
|||
You closed the discussion with a no consensus, defaulted to keep. Can you take another look at the decision? The only keep vote is from the article's creator who has less than a hundred minor edits. His rationale for keep is pretty week as well. [[User:2Joules|2Joules]] ([[User talk:2Joules|talk]]) 05:27, 2 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Hi {{u|2Joules}}. I took another look at the AfD and I do agree that the sole Keep is not really impressive. Unfortunately there is only one comment supporting Deletion. And the single Keep, which though not compelling is also not frivolous enough for me to completely disregard. The unhappy fact is that there is not a CONSENSUS favoring deletion. I considered relisting but the discussion has already been relisted twice and absent something unusual that's typically my limit. I suggest waiting a couple of weeks and renominating it. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 15:34, 2 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Tim Bjorkman == |
|||
I am puzzled by your decision and why, frankly, you are granted such authority. Your stated political beliefs lead me to believe you must, repeat MUST, no longer be involved in this process. Your bias is clear. |
|||
Tim Bjorkman is a lawyer, a judge who served more than a decade on the South Dakota bench, an author, historian and legal scholar and the 2018 Democratic candidate for South Dakota's lone congressional seat. There have been dozens and dozens of media reports on his campaign. He is indeed a newsworthy person. |
|||
In the page on the campaign, it appears all other candidates have pages. Why were they not deleted? I believe the answer is obvious. |
|||
Yes, I work for Tim's campaign as communications director. I want to be upfront about that. But as a longtime Wikipedia user, it's clear to me Mr. Bjorkman merits a Wikipedia page -- and you should have no role in deciding if it should exist. |
|||
Tom Lawrence |
|||
sdwriter25@gmail.com <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:26SDWriter|26SDWriter]] ([[User talk:26SDWriter#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/26SDWriter|contribs]]) 19:14, 2 July 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:{{tps}}{{ping|26SDWriter}}If you can cite "dozens and dozens" of media reports, you should probably do that. Merely insisting that they exist (while insulting the person whom you expect to help you, no less) is only going to result in most people assuming you are lying. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;">[[User:MPants at work|<span style="color:green;">'''ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants'''</span>]] [[User_talk:MPants at work|<small>Tell me all about it.</small>]]</span> 19:25, 2 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::@{{u|26SDWriter}} I am sorry that you feel that I have acted in bad faith [I also redirected a Republican candidates article last night]. You might also want to read [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ad_Orientem#Deb_Haaland this thread] a few spaces above. On Wikipedia we live and die by [[WP:CONSENSUS]]. And as I noted in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_undeletion#Tim_Bjorkman my earlier reply to you], in my judgement a rough consensus exists favoring deletion. If you wish to appeal my close you may do so at [[WP:DRV]]. I do appreciate your disclosure of your [[WP:COI]]. Again, best regards... -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 20:46, 2 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
*This is a little off topic, but I think the obvious explanation for why there's a push for articles about politicians is the little infoboxes google puts on the results page for the most famous person matching a name when you google that name. They used to pull information from a wide variety of sources, but seem to have cut back to just using WP data after the recent google image search lawsuit. I'd not be surprised if this push extended to all BLPs who value exposure. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;">[[User:MPants at work|<span style="color:green;">'''ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants'''</span>]] [[User_talk:MPants at work|<small>Tell me all about it.</small>]]</span> 12:58, 3 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Permissions == |
|||
What permission/user rights are required to view logs of deleted pages? I want to check who created a couple of pages I AFD'ed, but even though I watchlisted them, I am unable to view the history. I hold only extended confirmed rights. Which user rights should I apply for in order to view creation logs? |
|||
:Good morning {{u|2Joules}}. You have to be an administrator to see deleted pages. If you let me know which articles, I will check and get you the names of the creating editors. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 14:39, 3 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Miller Baking Company Comment == |
|||
Hi, can you expand a little on your rationale for No Consensus? The first Keep !vote uses the term "reliable sources" which is not the criteria for establishing notability. The next doesn't use any policy based arguments. The next also uses "third-party reliable sources" which isn't the criteria. The last states they've added references and posted a requested move. Basically, none of the Keep !voters have provided any indication of the criteria in NCORP. Can you help me understand how you weighted the Yea and Nay !votes? Thank you. [[User:HighKing|<b style="font-family: Courier; color: darkgreen;"> HighKing</b>]]<sup>[[User talk:HighKing|<span style="font-family: Courier; color: #da0000;">++ </span>]]</sup> 11:48, 3 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:@[[User:HighKing]] hmm, I thought I had satisfied [[WP:BEFORE]] and the article was deletion worthy. I seem to have removed it from my watchlist, or else I would have made this request myself. [[User:2Joules|2Joules]] ([[User talk:2Joules|talk]]) 14:31, 3 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::I will take another look as soon as I have cleared out my morning inbox. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 14:39, 3 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::@{{u|HighKing}} & {{u|2Joules}} After taking a closer look at the discussion and the article I have decided to re-open the discussion and relist it. You can read my explanation in the relist notice, but the short version is I think the pro-delete arguments are weightier than the keep, but I am not satisfied that consensus to that end is sufficiently strong to delete. This could be called a no consensus given that it has already been relisted twice, but I think we are close enough to consensus to justify a third relist. Thanks for bringing your concerns to my attention. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 15:58, 3 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::Sheesh, sorry to come back to this but I just don't get it. There were two more Keep !votes added after the discussion. One from the author, Jayfish420 who pretty much admits as his last comment that he's ''uploading appropriate supporting material now'' but never did. The last was by HenryMP02 who !votes using reasoning that is clearly ruled out in policy and guidelines. At worst (and only because the nom had been blocked as a sock) it should have been closed as No Consensus. Based on your comments before reopening that the arguments were stronger for deletion, it should have been closed as Delete. This isn't a !vote counting contest as we all know but the evidence on this AfD makes me think that sometimes, that is actually what is comes down to. [[User:HighKing|<b style="font-family: Courier; color: darkgreen;"> HighKing</b>]]<sup>[[User talk:HighKing|<span style="font-family: Courier; color: #da0000;">++ </span>]]</sup> 11:53, 12 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Good morning {{U|HighKing}} OK, I took yet another look at this. There is no way this could be closed as a delete. There is clearly no consensus that supports such a close. NOTAVOTE is not carte blanche for ignoring what appears to be consensus or inventing one that doesn't exist. However, I do think I erred in the close. This should have been procedurally closed as soon as the nom was identified as a sock per DENY. I am going to alter the close accordingly. This will be w/o prejudice to a speedy renomination if you are so inclined. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 15:03, 12 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::::No probs. I won't renom straight away either - I think the product might be notable so there's no real harm in leaving it at the "wrong" title for a while [[User:HighKing|<b style="font-family: Courier; color: darkgreen;"> HighKing</b>]]<sup>[[User talk:HighKing|<span style="font-family: Courier; color: #da0000;">++ </span>]]</sup> 16:38, 12 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::Actually, there's another AfD that was nominated by a (now) blocked sock - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/StuMagz StuMagz]. [[User:HighKing|<b style="font-family: Courier; color: darkgreen;"> HighKing</b>]]<sup>[[User talk:HighKing|<span style="font-family: Courier; color: #da0000;">++ </span>]]</sup> 10:39, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::AfD closed per DENY. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 15:08, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks. While you're on a roll - here's yet another couple - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Furniture_Choice AfD of Furniture Choice] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sunesis_Pharmaceuticals Sunesis Pharmaceuticals]. [[User:HighKing|<b style="font-family: Courier; color: darkgreen;"> HighKing</b>]]<sup>[[User talk:HighKing|<span style="font-family: Courier; color: #da0000;">++ </span>]]</sup> 16:22, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::Closed per DENY. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 16:33, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Jeffrey Sussman (Deletion) == |
|||
Hello |
|||
I am asking that the Jeffrey Sussman page be restored. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Vintagemovieguy|Vintagemovieguy]] ([[User talk:Vintagemovieguy#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Vintagemovieguy|contribs]]) 16:54, 3 July 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:{{not done}} See [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey Sussman]]. I stand by my close. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 17:07, 3 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Administrators' newsletter – July 2018 == |
|||
[[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter|News and updates for administrators]] from the past month (June 2018). |
|||
[[File:ANEWSicon.png|right|150px]] |
|||
[[File:Admin mop.PNG|20px|alt=]] '''Administrator changes''' |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-add.svg|20px|alt=added|Added]] [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Pbsouthwood|Pbsouthwood]] • [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/TheSandDoctor|TheSandDoctor]] |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-view-refresh.svg|20px|alt=readded|Readded]] [[Special:PermanentLink/847727925#Resysop request (Gogo Dodo)|Gogo Dodo]] |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special:PermanentLink/845192726#Andrevan's resignation|Andrevan]] • [[Special:PermanentLink/843863504#Inactive Administrators - June 2018|Doug]] • [[Special:PermanentLink/843863504#Inactive Administrators - June 2018|EVula]] • [[Special:PermanentLink/843863504#Inactive Administrators - June 2018|KaisaL]] • [[Special:PermanentLink/843863504#Inactive Administrators - June 2018|Tony Fox]] • [[Special:PermanentLink/843863504#Inactive Administrators - June 2018|WilyD]] |
|||
[[File:Wikipedia bureaucrat.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Bureaucrat changes''' |
|||
:[[File:Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg|20px|alt=removed|Removed]] [[Special:PermanentLink/845192726#Andrevan's resignation|Andrevan]] • [[Special:PermanentLink/843865109#Inactive Bureaucrats - June 2018|EVula]] |
|||
[[File:Green check.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Guideline and policy news''' |
|||
:* An [[Special:PermanentLink/845291235#RfC: Deletion of drafts|RfC about the deletion of drafts]] closed with a consensus to change the wording of [[WP:NMFD]]. Specifically, a draft that has been repeatedly resubmitted and declined at AfC without any substantial improvement may be deleted at [[WP:MFD|MfD]] if consensus determines that it is unlikely to ever meet the requirements for mainspace and it otherwise meets one of the [[Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#Reasons_for_deletion|reasons for deletion]] outlined in the deletion policy. |
|||
:* A [[Special:PermanentLink/848304259#Request for comment: Promising drafts|request for comment]] closed with a consensus that the {{tl|promising draft}} template cannot be used to indefinitely prevent a [[WP:G13]] speedy deletion nomination. |
|||
[[File:Octicons-tools.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Technical news''' |
|||
:* Starting on July 9, the WMF Security team, Trust & Safety, and the broader technical community will be seeking input on an [[phab:T190015|upcoming change]] that will [[meta:Creation of separate user group for editing sitewide CSS/JS|restrict editing of site-wide JavaScript and CSS]] to a new [[meta:Technical administrators|technical administrators]] user group. Bureaucrats and stewards will be able to grant this right per a community-defined process. The intention is to reduce the number of accounts who can edit frontend code to those who actually need to, which in turn lessens the risk of malicious code being added that compromises the security and privacy of everyone who accesses Wikipedia. For more information, please review the [[meta:Creation_of_separate_user_group_for_editing_sitewide_CSS/JS#FAQ|FAQ]]. |
|||
:* [[Syntax highlighting]] has been graduated from a Beta feature on the English Wikipedia. To enable this feature, click the highlighter icon ([[File:Codemirror-icon.png|20px]]) in your editing toolbar (or under the [[Hamburger button|hamburger menu]] in the [[mw:2017 wikitext editor|2017 wikitext editor]]). This feature can help prevent you from making mistakes when editing complex templates. |
|||
:* IP-based [[phab:T152462|cookie blocks]] should be [[phab:T192017|deployed]] to English Wikipedia in July (previously scheduled for June). This will cause the block of a logged-out user to be reloaded if they change IPs. This means in most cases, you may no longer need to do /64 range blocks on residential IPv6 addresses in order to effectively block the end user. It will also help combat abuse from IP hoppers in general. For the time being, it only affects users of the desktop interface. |
|||
[[File:Info Simple bw.svg|20px|alt=]] '''Miscellaneous''' |
|||
:* Currently around 20% of admins have enabled [[Wikipedia:Simple 2FA|two-factor authentication]], up from 17% a year ago. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider [[Wikipedia:Simple 2FA|doing so]]. Regardless if you use 2FA, please practice appropriate [[Wikipedia:User account security|account security]] by ensuring your password is [[Password_strength#Guidelines_for_strong_passwords|secure]] and unique to Wikimedia. |
|||
---- |
|||
{{center|{{flatlist| |
|||
* [[Wikipedia talk:Administrators' newsletter|Discuss this newsletter]] |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Subscribe|Subscribe]] |
|||
* [[Wikipedia:Administrators' newsletter/Archive|Archive]] |
|||
}}}} |
|||
<!-- |
|||
-->{{center|1=<small>Sent by [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 19:22, 3 July 2018 (UTC)</small>}} |
|||
<!-- Message sent by User:MusikAnimal@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_newsletter/Subscribe&oldid=848703312 --> |
|||
== Please comment on [[Talk:?egota#rfc_210E2F2|Talk:?egota]] == |
|||
The [[WP:Feedback request service|feedback request service]] is asking for participation in [[Talk:?egota#rfc_210E2F2|this request for comment on '''Talk:?egota''']]. <!-- Template:FRS message --> <!-- FRS id 90330 --> [[User:Legobot|Legobot]] ([[User talk:Legobot|talk]]) 04:24, 4 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Graham Kentsley == |
|||
Hello Ad Orientem! |
|||
You [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graham Kentsley|decided]] to keep the article about [[Graham Kentsley]] referring to lack of consensus. I think, that there was a consensus because all the real users with a real contribution to Wikipedia concurred that the person isn't notable enough for the encyclopedia. The lack of consensus was made only by newly registered users, who are probably associated with Kentsley. Moreover, all their arguments are like "look, he was mentioned in some local tabloid", but I believe that this is not a sufficient reason. So, what do you think about it? Unfortunately, I'm not very familiar with the rules of English Wikipedia, so could you please explain me how can I appeal the keeping decision? --[[User:XVodolazx|XVodolazx]] ([[User talk:XVodolazx|talk]]) 11:35, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
*Hi Ad Orientem, I found the fact that all the keep votes were made by new accounts suspicious as well, so I checked. The following accounts are {{likely}} to each other: |
|||
**{{user2|Joaomufc}} |
|||
**{{user2|Otrantos}} |
|||
*The following accounts are {{confirmed}} to each other and {{unrelated}} to the other two: |
|||
**{{user2|Garfild2017}} |
|||
**{{user2|Alexandr France}} |
|||
*{{bwt}}. You might want to consider reopening the AfD. Regards.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 13:25, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::Hi {{u|XVodolazx}} & {{u|Bbb23}} I have reverted my previous close and reclosed the discussion as '''delete'''. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 14:47, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thanks! --[[User:XVodolazx|XVodolazx]] ([[User talk:XVodolazx|talk]]) 19:33, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Toontown == |
|||
There are several issues with your close of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toontown]]. Firstly your close {{tq|redirect to [[Toontown (disambiguation)]]}} should be a nonstarter as that put the pages in the [[WP:MALPLACED]] work queue (which is how I found this close). Secondly, you should have realized that this close [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Wbm1058&offset=20180705050000&limit=25&target=Wbm1058 made some 25 pages link to the disambiguation] and taken it upon yourself to clean those up rather than leaving the task for some random editor to sort out. Of course, ''de facto'' deletion of the article on the topic (without actually deleting it) left nothing to disambiguate these links to, so I removed the links, and made sure that there was a nearby link to ''[[Who Framed Roger Rabbit]]'' or a related article, so that the meaning of "Toontown" could still be ascertained by the reader. Thirdly, since this close effectively removed the article from [[WP:primary topic]] status, it became necessary to move the article to a newly disambiguated title. While I was pondering over what title to move the article to, and sleeping on the matter, another editor [[special:permalink/848935716|filed a technical request]] to move the malplaced dab page, and administrator {{U|Anthony Appleyard}} move the redirected article page to {{no redirect|Toontown (version 2)}} – a title I'm not keen on, but understandable in this case. Fourthly, I question the need for a disambiguation page at all, as all of the items on the dab are Disney-related, excepting <code>"Toontown", a nickname for [[Saskatoon]]</code> which makes it a [[WP:TWODABS]] situation that could be handled by a hatnote. Checking [https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Toontown&year_start=1980&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CToontown%3B%2Cc0 Google Ngrams] for the date the term originated, I see that it wasn't on the radar until 1985, although there was some obscure usage before then. [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22toontown%22&lr=lang_en&biw=1920&bih=1067&source=lnt&tbs=lr%3Alang_1en%2Csbd%3A1%2Ccdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A1%2F1%2F1980%2Ccd_max%3A12%2F31%2F1991&tbm=bks Looking at Google Books] shows a handful of references that these mostly relate to [[Roger Rabbit]], as ''[[Who Censored Roger Rabbit?]]'' was published in 1981. The [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22toontown%22&lr=lang_en&biw=1920&bih=1067&source=lnt&tbs=lr%3Alang_1en%2Csbd%3A1%2Ccdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A1%2F1%2F1980%2Ccd_max%3A12%2F31%2F1992&tbm=bks floodgates opened by the early 1990s], following the 1988 release of the film. I don't find the argument that the term fails [[WP:GNG]] very convincing, given all these mentions by multiple independent publications. I think Disney made this a valid topic for a [[WP:Broad-concept article]] – there is a somewhat amorphous relationship between the articles on the disambiguation page. The idea that the article should "Merge with Toontown (disambiguation)" is another nonstarter. We don't merge content into disambiguation pages. This is more an argument for merging the disambiguation into the broad-concept article and ''deleting'' Toontown (disambiguation). If this is indeed a valid broad-concept created by Disney, then that negates the need to remove those 25 links to the topic. – [[User:Wbm1058|wbm1058]] ([[User talk:Wbm1058|talk]]) 15:58, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Hi {{u|Wbm1058}}. Ouch. I am somewhat surprised at the technical cluster bleep I appear to have caused. In particular the 25 links <s>as I almost always use XFD Closer and opt for the automatic removal of links to articles that are being deleted. I am not sure if this was something that XFD Closer missed or if I failed to hit the button when closing. I am guessing the latter.</s> In any event I apologize for the unnecessary added work. With respect to your analysis of the article, I think it is reasonable and I wish it had been a part of the discussion. It likely would have given me pause even in the face of the other four comments favoring redirection. (I dismissed the idea of a merge based on the poor referencing.). If you think it would be beneficial to reopen the discussion so you can add your views and see if that might change some of the minds of the other participating editors or persuade new ones, I am prepared to revert my close and relist the discussion. Let me know, and again I apologize for the abandoned links. Mea culp mea culpa mea maxima culpa... -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 17:51, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::Ok I am an idiot. Redirection does not = deletion. I should have grasped that and handled those. [facepalm]. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 17:57, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::: Thanks, no need to call yourself names, but I appreciate the response. That reminds me of an essay I made significant contributions to five years ago, [[Wikipedia:Deletion by redirection]]. Yes, I think reopening it is a good idea. I don't often participate in AfD discussions but would be happy to make the above points in a relisted discussion. – [[User:Wbm1058|wbm1058]] ([[User talk:Wbm1058|talk]]) 18:09, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{done}}. @{{u|Wbm1058}} When you comment, please ping the other participants to the discussion so they are aware the discussion has been reopened. Now I need to find the original article somewhere. Ugh... -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 18:25, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::::The original article is sitting at {{no redirect|Toontown (version 2)}}, as I mentioned above. Check the page history of that. [[User:Wbm1058|wbm1058]] ([[User talk:Wbm1058|talk]]) 18:27, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Ok this is going to get a bit messy. I think the best thing to do is revert the moves and redirects and reset to the status quo ante. Any objections? -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 18:32, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::That's fine, I could have run with it either way (reverse now, or reverse later if necessary). [[User:Wbm1058|wbm1058]] ([[User talk:Wbm1058|talk]]) 18:42, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::I decided to just revert pending the final close. The AfD template was on the wrong article and the links would have caused confusion for anyone joining the discussion. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 18:44, 5 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Block evasion by PeopleEater143 == |
|||
Hi AO. I have just been waiting since last year for this user to come back in some way, shape or form, and they're back using {{noping|208.28.133.202}} (they previously used this IP in 2017 with the same snark). I can spot their attitude anywhere. Last year they edit warred over the mere ''order'' of singles on [[÷ (album)]] and a slew of other then-recent pop music articles. Now they're back with their snark on recent pop music articles again. You can see (some) of their editing history at [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PeopleEater143/Archive]]. It's like they can't edit without writing smart alec edit summaries, for example usually something along the lines of "that's not how it works" and acting like they have final say on everything. Looks like they've been around for a while now with their snark, but I only just spotted them at [[Palo Santo (Years & Years album)]]. They also edit war like crazy. I'll report any further IP hops to you, because they came back using different usernames and IPs last year when users like myself and Jennica spotted a pattern (Jennica even said that she was sure they frequented a pop music forum she visited and were distinguishable by their attitude there). {{ping|Hayman30}} because they appeared to be editing [[Sweetener (album)]] quite a bit and you watch that article quite a bit. Can you be on the lookout there? Thanks! <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 00:01, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Blocked''' x 6 months. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 00:05, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::They're ''already'' back evading on the same article with the same attitude, using {{noping|2601:48:8100:6d8a:6c2c:18f2:ae34:53c4}}, which geolocates to the same area of the US. Can you please protect [[Palo Santo (Years & Years album)]]? Looks like it's going to be the latest target of sock activity. I've told them to find a hobby outside of Wikipedia; doubtful they'll comply. Also, I think it'd be wise to protect [[Sweetener (album)]] as I'm sure they'll go back there. <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 04:13, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::Blocked and page protected. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 04:31, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::@{{u|Bbb23}} When you get a minute can you check out Braxlee2323? I suspect they are PeopleEater143. Thanks... -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 04:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Thanks for all of that. I'm not so sure this Braxlee2323 editor is PeopleEater143 myself. They seem like a newbie, and I don't get the impression PeopleEater143 would write kind of naive summaries like "I just added a link to Sweetener on the top" and "Sry still learning". They're usually far more cocky and standoffish than to communicate doubt in anything they do. <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 05:04, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::::You may well be right which is why I didn't block them. But I am very suspicious that a newbie editor shows up at this particular moment and lands on the same article we are having sock issues with. I dropped a Welcome on their talk page in case I am wrong. Bbb23 can give us a verdict at his convenience. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 05:13, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::What account would I be comparing Braxlee2323 to? I can see only two named accounts that were ever blocked as socks of PE, and they're both quite stale.--[[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 13:13, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::{{u|Bbb23}} Ah. I think we will just have to wait and see how this user behaves. Thanks for looking. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 15:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
==Prabesh Samrat Bara== |
|||
::::Hey, Ad. The author of [[Prabesh Samrat Baral]] keeps removing the CSD tag of the article you deleted via AFD. Could you please take a look and maybe delete/salt the article? Thanks. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:1.1em/1em Arial Black;letter-spacing:-0.09em">[[User:Z0|<u style="color:#7f2ed1">The editor </u>]]<u style="color:#bfa6d8"><small>whose username is </small></u>[[User_talk:Z0|<u style="color:#7f2ed1">'''Z0'''</u>]]</u> 04:38, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:{{done}} -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 04:43, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::There's also a draft - [[Draft:Prabesh Samrat Baral]]. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:1.1em/1em Arial Black;letter-spacing:-0.09em">[[User:Z0|<u style="color:#7f2ed1">The editor </u>]]<u style="color:#bfa6d8"><small>whose username is </small></u>[[User_talk:Z0|<u style="color:#7f2ed1">'''Z0'''</u>]]</u> 04:44, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::Not anymore. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 04:45, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
==Block evasion by Drizzy010== |
|||
Hey again AO. The editor {{user|Drizzy010}} mostly edited [[Drake discography]] and several ''Billboard'' achievement pages; {{noping|Dalzon9596}} is doing exactly the same thing. Same type of edits to Drake discography and editing the other pages Drizzy010 did. <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 16:34, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Indeffed. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 16:45, 6 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:The user {{ping|ʎɐpʎɹəʌə pəəʍ əʞoɯs}} doesn't appear to be here for any constructive purpose. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_number-one_singles_of_2018_(Australia)&diff=prev&oldid=849195488 here], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kenmore_State_High_School&diff=prev&oldid=847865351 here], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Springwood,_Queensland&diff=prev&oldid=778814072 here]. <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 07:03, 7 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Indeffed. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 14:27, 7 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::Looks like Drizzy010/Dalzon9596 is back as {{noping|WD1024}}, who appears to have registered after you blocked Dalzon9596. Editing several pages related to Drake's recent achievements and several pages Dalzon and Drizzy frequented ([[:2018 in hip hop music]], [[:List of Billboard Hot 100 chart achievements by decade]]). <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 16:54, 12 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::Blocked and pages protected x 1 month. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 16:58, 12 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
==List of England international footballers (alphabetical)== |
|||
Hello, Ad. Recently, I merged [[List of England international footballers (alphabetical)]] to [[List of England international footballers]] and later redirected it to the latter per the result of an AFD. Another editor kept undoing the redirect, saying "the result is merge not redirect" but after completing the merge it is normal practice to redirect to the target article. It'll be great if you could take a look. <u style="text-decoration:none;font:1.1em/1em Arial Black;letter-spacing:-0.09em">[[User:Z0|<u style="color:#7f2ed1">The editor </u>]]<u style="color:#bfa6d8"><small>whose username is </small></u>[[User_talk:Z0|<u style="color:#7f2ed1">'''Z0'''</u>]]</u> 21:15, 7 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:I have restored the redirect per the clear consensus in the AfD. Hopefully this will be the end of the matter. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 22:15, 7 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" |
|||
== RE: restore John Humphrey (drummer) == |
|||
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png|100px]] |
|||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar''' |
|||
|- |
|||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thanks for your years of work in–among various other contributions–upholding NPOV. (In fact, I wouldn't mind seeing you more in the post-1992 politics arena again...) In any case, best wishes! [[User:Biohistorian15|Biohistorian15]] ([[User talk:Biohistorian15|talk]]) 16:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
|} |
|||
:@[[User:Biohistorian15|Biohistorian15]] Thank you for the kind words! That said I find the project's coverage of modern American politics to be a source of not infrequent frustration and prefer to avoid the topic except when dealing with obviously disruptive behavior. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 00:59, 5 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Hello, please restore John Humphrey (drummer) rather than redirect to The Nixons. His discography is with both bands. Also member of both bands. Here is one source showing Humphrey joining Seether in 2003. |
|||
::I understand. Now, since I already have your ear, I just stumbled over a major POV issue of a now desysoping admin as I was - litterally a min. ago - trying to add an innocuous biographical reference at [[Bryan Caplan]]: [[MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/August 2017#econlib.org|this ridiculous thread]] says it all. There seem to have been more than a dozen discussions regarding a removal of that link from the SPAM blacklist. Sorry for annoying you so immediately after you said not to bother with politics... but could you take a look? [[User:Biohistorian15|Biohistorian15]] ([[User talk:Biohistorian15|talk]]) 19:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::@[[User:Biohistorian15|Biohistorian15]] After reading through the discussion, I think the best course of action is to open an RfC. There is no consensus one way or another and not much participation. Hopefully that will get some more input. (I'm assuming you were not requesting I directly intervene on one side of the discussion, being mindful of WP:CANVASSING.) -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 23:56, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I'm not even all that sure what I was asking. Thanks, I'll look into that. [[User:Biohistorian15|Biohistorian15]] ([[User talk:Biohistorian15|talk]]) 07:36, 8 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Edit war at Mary Martin's article == |
|||
https://www.mlive.com/entertainment/saginaw/index.ssf/2011/07/seether_on_the_right_track_as.html <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Jhdrumr|Jhdrumr]] ([[User talk:Jhdrumr#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jhdrumr|contribs]]) 01:42, 8 July 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:{{not done}} Hi [[User:Jhdrumr|Jhdrumr]]. As was explained on your talk page, a discussion about the article resulted in a consensus that the subject does not currently meet our guidelines for establishing [[WP:N|encyclopedic notability]]. Please see [[WP:BASIC]] and [[WP:MUSICBIO]] for a more detailed explanation for how to establish notability. If you believe that you have found enough coverage in reliable secondary sources to do this you may create a [[WP:DRAFT]] and submit for review at [[WP:AfC]]. Please be sure to declare any relationship you may have with the subject before doing so. See also [[WP:COI]]. Best regards... -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 02:14, 8 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Can you, Ad Orientem, please visit the article for entertainer '''[[Mary Martin]]''' and do something about an edit war there? Editors already have started a topic on Mary's Talk page, and they can't resolve the issue. If you don't have time, can you please suggest another User Talk page or page for Arbitration where I can make this appeal? Thank you for reading this.[[User:YemeniKaras|YemeniKaras]] ([[User talk:YemeniKaras|talk]]) 22:37, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
https://www.moderndrummer.com/article/july-2018-seethers-john-humphrey/ |
|||
:@[[User:YemeniKaras|YemeniKaras]] I have placed a low level of protection on the page to prevent IPs and brand-new accounts from making changes without review. Hopefully that will slow things down. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 23:54, 7 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
https://www.sabian.com/en/artist/john-humphrey |
|||
== [[user:SashaHaza]] == |
|||
https://www.therockpit.net/2018/interview-john-humphrey-seether/ |
|||
Thanks for that block. I was in the midst of writing an ANI report, so you saved me the trouble. I don't know whether that was trolling or just new user incompetence, but it reaches a point where it does not matter. [[User:Meters|Meters]] ([[User talk:Meters|talk]]) 01:47, 10 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
http://www.goldminemag.com/articles/kiss-collection-is-seether-drummers-pride-and-joy |
|||
:@[[User:Meters|Meters]] I tend to agree. It might be a really bad CIR fail, but they filed a blatantly false report against you at AIV, which suggests they are not a brand new user. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 01:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
https://www.axs.com/into-the-pit-interview-with-seether-drummer-john-humphrey-68927 |
|||
== James Coco == |
|||
https://substreammagazine.com/2014/06/seethers-john-humphrey-talks-isolate-and-medicate-music-and-family/ |
|||
Thank you for doing something about the edit war at Mary Martin’s article. You might want to check out a possible edit war at the article of actor [[James Coco]], who passed in 1987. [[User:Brent Brant|Brent Brant]] ([[User talk:Brent Brant|talk]]) 01:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
https://amnplify.com.au/portfolio-items/interview-with-john-humphrey-of-seether/ <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Jhdrumr|Jhdrumr]] ([[User talk:Jhdrumr#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jhdrumr|contribs]]) 04:00, 8 July 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
*Again, please see my comment above. You can write a draft and add the sources. Then submit to AfC. The original article is still available in the page history of the redirect if you want the text. However, I am not going to reverse the decision of the discussion when the consensus was so clear. Best regards... -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 04:04, 8 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:@[[User:Brent Brant|Brent Brant]] It looks like the sourcing issue has been resolved. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 02:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== You should be a comedian == |
|||
== Disruptive user == |
|||
I happened to come across your express lane analogy [[User talk:Brownspoof#June 2018|here]]. Thanks for the laughs! Noticed their name had a strike-through at [[Chris Savino]] and got curious, then I see your funny message. [[User:Amaury|Amaury]] (<small>[[User talk:Amaury|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Amaury|contribs]]</small>) 16:59, 9 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Hello! back in May you blocked a user named "Bkeira" for disruptive editing. Their disruptive editing has worsened til the point another user has complained to me on my page in regards to them. I think that it's time for "Bkeira" to be banned permanently. "Bkeira" is obsessed with editing composition sections on music articles. Their edits usually consist of original research, and when users revert their edits they engage in edit wars. [[User:OkIGetIt20|OkIGetIt20]] ([[User talk:OkIGetIt20|talk]]) 17:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Tanapot2001 socking again == |
|||
:@[[User:OkIGetIt20|OkIGetIt20]] Are you sure you have the right user? There is no record for a user named Bkeira. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 18:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Hey AO, the Drake-loving block-evading editor from Thailand, Tanapot2001, is back using {{noping|27.55.99.17}} <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 19:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
: |
::@[[User:OkIGetIt20|OkIGetIt20]] Never mind. I figured it out and have blocked them for a week. They are on notice that this is the last stop before an indefinite block. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 18:44, 12 June 2024 (UTC) |
||
== The 92.53.17.0/24 saga continues... == |
|||
== Reporting 108.31.98.232 == |
|||
Hi Ad Orientem, |
|||
{{user|108.31.98.232}} This editor keeps adding false information in the album ratings template in music-related articles [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Testing_%28album%29&type=revision&diff=849261352&oldid=847622373] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Die_Lit&diff=prev&oldid=849559876] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Section.80&type=revision&diff=849598249&oldid=846992385]. [[User:TheAmazingPeanuts|TheAmazingPeanuts]] ([[User talk:TheAmazingPeanuts|talk]]) 06:14, 10 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Blocked x 60 hrs. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 13:39, 10 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
In December 2022, you blocked the 92.53.17.0/24 range for one year for disruptive edits ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3A92.53.17.0%2F24 block log]). Their changes are typically made under the "New changes" edit summary. |
|||
== TITANIIC == |
|||
While there has no longer been any more disruption from that IP range since the block expired, unfortunately they have still been at it with other addresses/ranges, resulting in them getting blocked as well (e.g. [[Special:Contribs/31.11.96.0/19|31.11.96.0/19]]). |
|||
Can you take a look at the article [[TITANIIC]]? (Yes, that's the way it is spelled.) This is another ''Titanic'' replica project but by Czech entrepreneur Ondřej Vrkoč. It's flown under the radar here as it is an orphan article. Very hard to evaluate the reliability of the sources as they are mostly in Czech and the English language articles are Wiki mirrors. But from what I can tell it's all self promotion with help from an editor with an apparent COI. The project leader claims a collaboration with QM2 designer Stephen Payne and a business partnership with shipyard STX France. Maybe he spoke with them but an official role in his project is something on another level. As the main editor of Payne's article I don't see somebody with his credentials being associated with a ship that would have numerous SOLAS issues if built in the 1912 form. STX France's site comes up with zero results for a search of "Titaniic". |
|||
Right now, they seem to be using the range [[Special:Contribs/46.123.240.0/20|46.123.240.0/20]] for the most part. However, Binksternet on [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Block evasion from Slovenia and Macedonia|this AN/I report]] recommends blocking two smaller ranges, [[Special:Contribs/46.123.241.0/24|46.123.241.0/24]] and [[Special:Contribs/46.123.248.0/21|46.123.248.0/21]] instead. |
|||
Given the lack of geographic scope, and difficulty of RS verification, at best this is a merger with [[Replica Titanic]] or a straight up AfD. I can merge it but I'd like to get another editor's opinion. <span style="color: blue">[[User:Blue Riband|Blue]] [[User talk:Blue Riband|Riband►]]</span> 02:55, 11 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Hi {{u|Blue Riband}}. Wow. That is dreadful. You can always ask for help on the Project Ships talk page. But FWIW I think it's an unencyclopedic mess with far too many issues to be in the mainspace as a stand alone article. My suggestion is boldly merge and redirect it. If challenged send it to AfD. If there is a sense that the subject is actually independently notable I could see sending it into draft space pending a massive overhaul. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 03:12, 11 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::P.S. It's getting late here and I am off to bed. But I will look in on this tomorrow. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 03:14, 11 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Just wondering if you could look at it and decide whether to block the larger encompassing /20 range, or those two smaller aforementioned ranges; asking since the AN/I thread hasn't received attention for two days. |
|||
== Registered user using an IP to make disruptive edits == |
|||
Regards, — [[User:AP 499D25|<span style="background:#1F6295;color:white;padding:1q 5q;border-radius:10q;font-family:Franklin Gothic, Verdana">AP 499D25</span>]] [[User talk:AP 499D25|<span style="color:#1A527D">(talk)</span>]] 01:24, 15 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Hi AO, a week ago I reverted the user {{noping|InUser}} on [[CeCe Peniston discography]] for their thinking things don't need to be sourced on Wikipedia, because they seem to be under the impression that some very relative things are "common knowledge". Just half an hour ago, they edited using the IP {{noping|89.24.184.201}} to revert me twice: once on CeCe Peniston discography ''and'' InUser's talk page, both times using the summary I wrote when I reverted InUser's message on my talk page (which is a giveaway it was them). Now, not only that, but InUser seems to have edited several topics related to [[:Jessica Lange]]. Not coincidentally, the IP address has edited Jessica Lange's awards and nominations page. This seems like a deliberate attempt to make disruptive, spiteful edits/reverts (copying my edit summary) while logged out. <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 11:36, 11 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:I've dropped a warning on their talk page about the logged out editing. That's definitely a no no. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 13:53, 11 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:@[[User:AP 499D25|AP 499D25]] I've blocked the /20 range x 6 months. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 02:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Deletion of The Signals Network page == |
|||
::Thanks! I'm sure Binksternet would appreciate it too! — [[User:AP 499D25|<span style="background:#1F6295;color:white;padding:1q 5q;border-radius:10q;font-family:Franklin Gothic, Verdana">AP 499D25</span>]] [[User talk:AP 499D25|<span style="color:#1A527D">(talk)</span>]] 04:26, 15 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Uncterchud == |
|||
Hi Ad Orientem, |
|||
First of all beware I'm a newbie in wikipedia. I tried to get a new page in wikipedia for a non profit called "The Signals Network" that offers protection for whistleblowers. It appeared that the page was instantly marked for deletion : not enough notable sources -- from what I understood. I wanted to improve it but now that it has been removed is there a way I can get my text back in some way? (through some kind of revision history?). |
|||
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Signals_Network |
|||
--[[User:Mathieuleddet|Mathieuleddet]] ([[User talk:Mathieuleddet|talk]]) 09:20, 12 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Good morning [[User:Mathieuleddet|Mathieuleddet]]. I have userfied the article which can now be found at [[User:Mathieuleddet/The Signals Network]]. Please note, this page is not to be moved back into the article mainspace w/o first submitting it to [[WP:AfC]] for review and approval. I am going to tag it as a [[WP:DRAFT]]. Best regards... -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 15:28, 12 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Please also revoke TPA from [[User:Uncterchud|Uncterchud]] and [[User:Bonefrag|Bonefrag]] as they are likely socks of [[User:Pœnis|Pœnis]], whose TPA has been revoked, based on behavioral evidence: lewd images of women and harassing me on my userspace. [[User:Air on White|Air on White]] ([[User talk:Air on White|talk]]) 01:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Denis Law (politician) == |
|||
:@[[User:Air on White|Air on White]] Done. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 01:38, 18 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I understand that the numerical votes in the discussion (as it was) favored deletion, but I think it is important that as the closer of the AfD, that you add explanation for the close. Most of the delete votes (Nom, Tillerh11, John Paul Lambert) put in their comments before the expansion of the article (now I feel appropriate proclaiming [[WP:HEY]]). The argument raised in favor of deletion by SportingFlyer was rejected by Bearcat. And, it is not hard to characterize Mangoe's argument as "only things that happen in big cities are important." But, because AfD is not a vote, but a discussion of policy, I feel that as the closer, you should articulate which rational(s) you based the close upon, rather than a simple "delete." |
|||
== Blocked IP == |
|||
As Bearcat alluded earlier on your talk page (which I also fully agree with), these AfDs do set precedent (to a degree, as certain arguments are stronger than others). In my concluding comments on the AfD, "there are lots of local mayors" who are similar to the final version of the (now) deleted page, who are mayors of cities with a substantial sized population, whose article is greater than stub length, and whose merits would presumably be debated around the "significant things he did in the position" - as Bearcat mentioned, which is not, traditionally, been a question of this project. --[[User:Enos733|Enos733]] ([[User talk:Enos733|talk]]) 06:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:This is not a case of vote counting. There is a fairly strong [[WP:CONSENSUS]] that the coverage in reliable sources is insufficient to ring the WP:N bell. When I read the discussion it appeared that you were taking issue with NPOL and or the way it has been applied. That may well be a discussion worth having. But this isn't the right venue for that. The bottomline is that AfD is not always perfect or even generally consistent. We base our decisions on consensus and that is typically dictated by those who show up for the discussion and in all but the rarest of cases, which ''would'' need a serious explanation, a closing admin is bound to respect that. Indeed if anyone closed this as a Keep or even a No Consensus I think such a close might well be challenged at DRV with a very strong likelihood of being overturned. Best regards... -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 14:46, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::Where would be the appropriate forum to have the discussion? Because, by endorsing the close, I feel that the strongest argument for deletion along the lines of not sufficient coverage in reliable sources completely discounts any local reporting, to the point of worthlessness. Also, because the arguments that the sources were insufficient came before substantial work was done on the article (taking it from a very incomplete stub to a full article), the close also has the effect of discouraging recreation (as revised). --[[User:Enos733|Enos733]] ([[User talk:Enos733|talk]]) 16:17, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::If you want to discuss the guidelines for notability relating to politicians that can be done at [[WT:BIO]]. If you want to challenge the actual close that would be done at [[WP:DRV]]. In the latter case please read the directions carefully as DRV is not where you rehash the AfD but rather whether the closing admin correctly interpreted the consensus. Best regards... -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 16:23, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::::Are you wiling to put the article in my draft space? The problem I run into is that if the decision to close was based on inadequate sources I am not sure what sources are needed to add to the article to satisfy concerns of the delete votes (based on the most recent version, not the article when it was proposed for deletion). --[[User:Enos733|Enos733]] ([[User talk:Enos733|talk]]) 17:47, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::::{{done}} @{{u|Enos733}} This page is not to be restored to the mainspace w/o first being submitted as a draft for review at [[WP:AfC]]. Good luck. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 18:27, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Saw you blocked my IP address recently for disruptive editing, but wasn't sure why. I'm assuming it wasn't for something I did, since all of those edits are still live (and, as far as I can tell, properly sourced). The one closest to the block date was an edit to [[List of 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup controversies]] (the most recent edit, made June 7th), which was a to correct a spelling error (the only change). I assume that the block isn't for that edit, and it's the only edit made by that IP. |
|||
== Girls Like You page protection == |
|||
Reason I wasn't logged in, was because I keep getting logged out, and I can't be bothered to log back in just to fix a minor issue. |
|||
Hey AO. Basically every day, an IP in the 83.xx.xxx.xxx range is coming back around to [[Girls Like You]] and adding a bunch of unreliable charts (listed at [[WP:BADCHARTS]]), unsourced or component charts we don't need. Can you maybe protect it for a bit? This 83-range IP is persistent with Maroon 5 articles; they did it previously at [[What Lovers Do]] as well. <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 12:42, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:Has there been any attempt to communicate with this user on a talk page somewhere? I realize that may be difficult if they are a dynamic IP. But while potentially disruptive, and certainly irritating, this isn't naked vandalism. Some attempt at communication should normally be attempted before protecting pages that do garner a high level of editing from the internet. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 15:12, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::I did explain them multiple times to check [[WP:BADCHARTS]] on the talk pages of various IP addresses they used to edit [[What Lovers Do]]. They would continue restoring it regardless. This is what's happening here, and I've just undone another round of it. <b>[[User:Ss112|<span style="color: #FF6347;">Ss</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Ss112|<span style="color: #1E90FF;">112</span>]]</small></b> 16:06, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:::Page protected for a few days. Let's see what happens after that. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 18:28, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Just would like some clarification as to what exactly the block was for, so I can avoid making the mistake again (assuming it was something I did, and not someone else in the household). [[User:Jaydee Richardson|Jaydee Richardson]] ([[User talk:Jaydee Richardson|talk]]) 11:19, 21 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Choice? == |
|||
:Hi [[User:Jaydee Richardson|Jaydee Richardson]]. I'm not sure what the specific reason was because I cannot see the IP address associated with this account. However, over the last few days I have imposed several range blocks because one or more users within those ranges were IP hopping and causing a lot of disruption. It's possible your IP was caught in one of those blocks, though I can't state anything with certainty without knowing the IP address in question. That said, please don't post your IP here as that can be used by people with malicious intent. If you want a more definitive explanation, feel free to email me privately with your IP and I will have a look at the blog log. Editing anonymously is not prohibited generally speaking. However shared IP addresses are vulnerable to these kinds of blocks for obvious reasons. I see that you have recently signed up for an account. That is almost always the best way to edit the encyclopedia and it also over time will allow you to contribute to areaa of the project that are protected from anonymous editing. Best regards... -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 11:59, 21 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Hi there! I was interested to see your close [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Furniture Choice|here]], and wondered if you had seen the brief discussion at [[Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion#Sockpuppet nominations]]. I'm fully in agreement with you, but I'm not sure that those other editors would be. Regards, [[User:Justlettersandnumbers|Justlettersandnumbers]] ([[User talk:Justlettersandnumbers|talk]]) 19:30, 13 July 2018 (UTC) |
|||
::This is my first account. I have another one, but forgot the login info, since I barely used it. If you need to know the IP, you can see it in the last edit to the page linked in my message. |
|||
::There's a chance that my dad might've edited something, since he got me to do that a few months ago. He doesn't have an account as far as I can tell. |
|||
::I'll remember to be logged in from now on though. [[User:Jaydee Richardson|Jaydee Richardson]] ([[User talk:Jaydee Richardson|talk]]) 12:35, 21 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::@[[User:Jaydee Richardson|Jaydee Richardson]] The block log only shows a single page block for that specific IP and no current site blocks. So if you were blocked then it was almost certainly a range block and it has since expired. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem#top|talk]]) 13:05, 21 June 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:05, 21 June 2024
Index |
This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
A barnstar for you!
![]() |
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
Thanks for your years of work in–among various other contributions–upholding NPOV. (In fact, I wouldn't mind seeing you more in the post-1992 politics arena again...) In any case, best wishes! Biohistorian15 (talk) 16:54, 4 June 2024 (UTC) |
- @Biohistorian15 Thank you for the kind words! That said I find the project's coverage of modern American politics to be a source of not infrequent frustration and prefer to avoid the topic except when dealing with obviously disruptive behavior. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:59, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- I understand. Now, since I already have your ear, I just stumbled over a major POV issue of a now desysoping admin as I was - litterally a min. ago - trying to add an innocuous biographical reference at Bryan Caplan: this ridiculous thread says it all. There seem to have been more than a dozen discussions regarding a removal of that link from the SPAM blacklist. Sorry for annoying you so immediately after you said not to bother with politics... but could you take a look? Biohistorian15 (talk) 19:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Biohistorian15 After reading through the discussion, I think the best course of action is to open an RfC. There is no consensus one way or another and not much participation. Hopefully that will get some more input. (I'm assuming you were not requesting I directly intervene on one side of the discussion, being mindful of WP:CANVASSING.) -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:56, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not even all that sure what I was asking. Thanks, I'll look into that. Biohistorian15 (talk) 07:36, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Biohistorian15 After reading through the discussion, I think the best course of action is to open an RfC. There is no consensus one way or another and not much participation. Hopefully that will get some more input. (I'm assuming you were not requesting I directly intervene on one side of the discussion, being mindful of WP:CANVASSING.) -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:56, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- I understand. Now, since I already have your ear, I just stumbled over a major POV issue of a now desysoping admin as I was - litterally a min. ago - trying to add an innocuous biographical reference at Bryan Caplan: this ridiculous thread says it all. There seem to have been more than a dozen discussions regarding a removal of that link from the SPAM blacklist. Sorry for annoying you so immediately after you said not to bother with politics... but could you take a look? Biohistorian15 (talk) 19:21, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Edit war at Mary Martin's article
Can you, Ad Orientem, please visit the article for entertainer Mary Martin and do something about an edit war there? Editors already have started a topic on Mary's Talk page, and they can't resolve the issue. If you don't have time, can you please suggest another User Talk page or page for Arbitration where I can make this appeal? Thank you for reading this.YemeniKaras (talk) 22:37, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- @YemeniKaras I have placed a low level of protection on the page to prevent IPs and brand-new accounts from making changes without review. Hopefully that will slow things down. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:54, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for that block. I was in the midst of writing an ANI report, so you saved me the trouble. I don't know whether that was trolling or just new user incompetence, but it reaches a point where it does not matter. Meters (talk) 01:47, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Meters I tend to agree. It might be a really bad CIR fail, but they filed a blatantly false report against you at AIV, which suggests they are not a brand new user. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
James Coco
Thank you for doing something about the edit war at Mary Martin’s article. You might want to check out a possible edit war at the article of actor James Coco, who passed in 1987. Brent Brant (talk) 01:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Brent Brant It looks like the sourcing issue has been resolved. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Disruptive user
Hello! back in May you blocked a user named "Bkeira" for disruptive editing. Their disruptive editing has worsened til the point another user has complained to me on my page in regards to them. I think that it's time for "Bkeira" to be banned permanently. "Bkeira" is obsessed with editing composition sections on music articles. Their edits usually consist of original research, and when users revert their edits they engage in edit wars. OkIGetIt20 (talk) 17:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- @OkIGetIt20 Are you sure you have the right user? There is no record for a user named Bkeira. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- @OkIGetIt20 Never mind. I figured it out and have blocked them for a week. They are on notice that this is the last stop before an indefinite block. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:44, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
The 92.53.17.0/24 saga continues...
Hi Ad Orientem,
In December 2022, you blocked the 92.53.17.0/24 range for one year for disruptive edits (block log). Their changes are typically made under the "New changes" edit summary.
While there has no longer been any more disruption from that IP range since the block expired, unfortunately they have still been at it with other addresses/ranges, resulting in them getting blocked as well (e.g. 31.11.96.0/19).
Right now, they seem to be using the range 46.123.240.0/20 for the most part. However, Binksternet on this AN/I report recommends blocking two smaller ranges, 46.123.241.0/24 and 46.123.248.0/21 instead.
Just wondering if you could look at it and decide whether to block the larger encompassing /20 range, or those two smaller aforementioned ranges; asking since the AN/I thread hasn't received attention for two days.
Regards, — AP 499D25 (talk) 01:24, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- @AP 499D25 I've blocked the /20 range x 6 months. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:04, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! I'm sure Binksternet would appreciate it too! — AP 499D25 (talk) 04:26, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Uncterchud
Please also revoke TPA from Uncterchud and Bonefrag as they are likely socks of Pœnis, whose TPA has been revoked, based on behavioral evidence: lewd images of women and harassing me on my userspace. Air on White (talk) 01:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Air on White Done. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:38, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Blocked IP
Saw you blocked my IP address recently for disruptive editing, but wasn't sure why. I'm assuming it wasn't for something I did, since all of those edits are still live (and, as far as I can tell, properly sourced). The one closest to the block date was an edit to List of 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup controversies (the most recent edit, made June 7th), which was a to correct a spelling error (the only change). I assume that the block isn't for that edit, and it's the only edit made by that IP.
Reason I wasn't logged in, was because I keep getting logged out, and I can't be bothered to log back in just to fix a minor issue.
Just would like some clarification as to what exactly the block was for, so I can avoid making the mistake again (assuming it was something I did, and not someone else in the household). Jaydee Richardson (talk) 11:19, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Jaydee Richardson. I'm not sure what the specific reason was because I cannot see the IP address associated with this account. However, over the last few days I have imposed several range blocks because one or more users within those ranges were IP hopping and causing a lot of disruption. It's possible your IP was caught in one of those blocks, though I can't state anything with certainty without knowing the IP address in question. That said, please don't post your IP here as that can be used by people with malicious intent. If you want a more definitive explanation, feel free to email me privately with your IP and I will have a look at the blog log. Editing anonymously is not prohibited generally speaking. However shared IP addresses are vulnerable to these kinds of blocks for obvious reasons. I see that you have recently signed up for an account. That is almost always the best way to edit the encyclopedia and it also over time will allow you to contribute to areaa of the project that are protected from anonymous editing. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 11:59, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- This is my first account. I have another one, but forgot the login info, since I barely used it. If you need to know the IP, you can see it in the last edit to the page linked in my message.
- There's a chance that my dad might've edited something, since he got me to do that a few months ago. He doesn't have an account as far as I can tell.
- I'll remember to be logged in from now on though. Jaydee Richardson (talk) 12:35, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Jaydee Richardson The block log only shows a single page block for that specific IP and no current site blocks. So if you were blocked then it was almost certainly a range block and it has since expired. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:05, 21 June 2024 (UTC)