- Dispute resolution clause: By posting on my user talk page, you agree to resolve all disputes that may arise from your interactions with me through the dispute resolution processes offered within the Wikipedia Community. BD2412
- Archives
- By topic (prior to June 1, 2009):
- Articles-1st/Deletion-1st-2d/Law-1st-2d-3d-4th-5th
- Misc.-1st-2d-3d-4th/RfA-1st-2d-3d-4th/Tools-1st-2nd-3rd/Vandalism
- Dated (beginning June 1, 2009):
- 001-002-003-004-005-006-007-008-009-010-011-012-013-014-015-016-017
- 018-019-020-021-022-023-024-025-026-027-028-029-030-031-032-033-034
- 035-036-037-038-039-040-041-042-043-044-045-046-047-048-049-050
"Princeton" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Princeton and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 2#Princeton until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk) 14:13, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Canvassing and edit warring
Can you please provide input [| here ]. There is an editor canvassing other editors by pinging them in a discussion and a topic they have nothing to do with. These editors are also making edits while an ongoing discussion is happening on the talk page without contributing to the discussion. Thanks in advance. TruthGuardians (talk) 16:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Restoring comments on other’s talkpages
That is not allowed, please refrain from doing so. And stop harassing me--CreecregofLife (talk) 18:30, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- I merely pointed out that in your reversion of reliably sourced content with which you disagree, you also reverted the addition of citations unrelated to that content. This is not the first time you have made exactly that error. Please be more cognizant of the consequences of your edits. BD2412 T 19:28, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- No you didn’t. You restored comments I had already removed. I’m getting really fed up with you CreecregofLife (talk) 21:08, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- A great many editors and admins seems to be really fed up with you. Perhaps it's not an "everyone else" problem. BD2412 T 22:55, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- A "great many"? Care to have any actual recent examples? Because I haven't done anything to warrant such CreecregofLife (talk) 23:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- The last time you were brought to ANI by another editor, you narrowly avoided at least a one month site ban. BD2412 T 23:39, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- A "great many"? Care to have any actual recent examples? Because I haven't done anything to warrant such CreecregofLife (talk) 23:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- A great many editors and admins seems to be really fed up with you. Perhaps it's not an "everyone else" problem. BD2412 T 22:55, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- No you didn’t. You restored comments I had already removed. I’m getting really fed up with you CreecregofLife (talk) 21:08, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 22:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Steel1943 (talk) 22:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the List of municipal flags in the Czech Republic
I know you are aware that the List of municipal flags in the Czech Republic article is deleted for WP:NOTGALLERY but can it be recreated if all information about the flags are added? I had transferred the gallery to Wikimedia Commons and added information from REKOS (I had translate from Czech because the deleted article does not have a Czech Wikipedia page yet) and other sites of municipalities. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 23:54, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- If you intend to do that, I would suggest creating a draft and then submitting it for administrative review. BD2412 T 00:10, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- OK thanks. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 00:23, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Old IP talk
Hi BD2412, I noticed that you have been removing old warnings from IP talkpages. I have been operating MalnadachBot to fix Lint errors sitewide, many of which are in old IP talk pages. Due to this, there are many pages where my bot has fixed Lint errors, followed by you removing the page text [1] [2]. This makes the preceding bot edit redundant. It will be great if we can coordinate to avoid unnecesary edits. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 08:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- creating a guideline to blank an IPs talk page after a certain time (either from latest TP activity, or IP's contribution), and then a bot for blanking such talkpages using these parameters would be a good idea. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:34, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah. I volunteer to create such a bot task if there is consensus for it. Deletion of old IP talkpages used to be done years ago, but was stopped for some reason. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 12:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Deletion hides potentially useful edit history, as when a defunct occasional IP vandal returns after years of absence and returns to their previous patterns. Blanking is preferred because it reduces link load (the crudding up of "What links here" pages) and avoids confusion on the part of legitimate new editors editing from an old IP, and seeing a bunch of warnings apparently directed at them. When we switched from deletion to blanking, I had to restore-and-blank about a thousand IP talk pages that I had previously deleted. BD2412 T 12:49, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks. Since this is a fairly staraightforward and noncontroversial task, I think it is better done by a bot. A cursory search shows me that there is at least 1.5 million IP talk pages without a block notice and has not received any message after 2013. Considering the number of the pages involved, I am thinking about holding an RFC at WP:VPR and submitting a WP:BRFA if there is consensus for it. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 13:30, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've been down that road without success, but it was several years ago, so perhaps times have changed. BD2412 T 13:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Lets follow this up at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)#Draft RFC: Bot to blank old IP talkpages. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 15:31, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Deletion hides potentially useful edit history, as when a defunct occasional IP vandal returns after years of absence and returns to their previous patterns. Blanking is preferred because it reduces link load (the crudding up of "What links here" pages) and avoids confusion on the part of legitimate new editors editing from an old IP, and seeing a bunch of warnings apparently directed at them. When we switched from deletion to blanking, I had to restore-and-blank about a thousand IP talk pages that I had previously deleted. BD2412 T 12:49, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Nomination of Mount Rushmore in popular culture for deletion
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mount Rushmore in popular culture until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- This is a thoughtless nomination, and an insincere one given the lack of effort to examine the article. BD2412 T 12:50, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for trying to save this. I've left my review and tags. The good news is that I now believe this topic is notable, and we already have sufficient content for a stub. The bad news is that I still believe 95% of the current content has to be removed. But I think whatever articl emerges from this trial by fire will be much more useful to the readers than the older page (sometimes more is not better). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:08, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Naruto-Rushmore.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Naruto-Rushmore.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
Kim Iversen
Hi, can you refund her article for me? I will try to work on it and address the concerns made at AFD. Eden5 (talk) 05:44, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Eden5: Done; see Draft:Kim Iversen. Cheers! BD2412 T 05:49, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
Templating out IP talk space messages
{{OW}} belongs below {{Shared IP}}. Please don't remove those Shared templates, they're useful to admins. –Skywatcher68 (talk) 16:33, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- Having been an administrator on this project for over 15 years, I am fairly well-versed in what is useful to admins. Templates on pages that have not been touched for many years, and from IP addresses that have not been used to edit for many years, are not actually particularly useful. IP ranges get reassigned from time to time, and the fact that a given IP address has seen no activity for multiple years suggests that information about it may be out of date. BD2412 T 16:47, 12 May 2022 (UTC)