This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hi there, sorry to bother you again but after you warned him to stop, Saladin1987 ( talk · contribs) is again removing sourced content from multiple pages [1] [2] [3] and POV pushing. [4] [5] He's just playing around and I'm certain that he doesn't care about being blocked because he is very likely using other accounts. See also here. As for me, I'm a neutral and serious editor who enjoys doing complex research on subjects so you should know how I feel when people such as Saladin1987 come to bother me.-- Fareed30 ( talk) 00:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi mate i am alreday having discussion with him on the talk page also i am having discussion with him on wikipedia admin page. but he seems to not respond to the talk page and is not ready to go for a consencus. He has removed my sources and placed his sources and In Anil Kapoor article he himself is using a youtube source and is against my youtube source. I would appreciate if you could ask him to leave ethnicity out of the article until proper consecus is acheieved. Also i have tried to stop him from edit warring by just removing the ethnicity but he keeps on editing it which is against the rules of Wikipedia and is called edit warring. He needs to use to talk pages for Prithviraj Kapoor Anil Kapoor Kapoor family Raj Kapoor Surinder Kapoor in order to achieve a consensus whether the disputed ethnicity needs to be added or not as i have placed many reliable sources on the talk pages of these articles which he seems to ignore.Saladin1987 05:11, 21 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saladin1987 ( talk • contribs)
Hi also i have removed the ethnicity of Anil kapoor and have started a conversaton on the talk pages i.e [ [6]] as the reliable source that he is using is a youtube so as mine. In the case of Prithviraj Kapoor i havent changed the article and i have started conversation on the talk page i.e [ [7]] and i have placed many sourced links but Fareed30 hasnt responded to those. In case of Kapoor Family a previous concensus was acheived but he removed it and placed his version , i have started a converstaion there too [ [8]] We are also having converstaion on [ [9]] Admin talk page and all he demands is my ban. When i am not even doing edit warring, its him who keeps on reverting the articles by placing disputed ethnicities in them for example [ [10]] [ [11]] [ [12]] [ [13]] [ [14]]
Now from above it is clear that all he does is chnage the ethnicity in the articles when the ethnciity is completely in conflict. Some sources say they are Punjabi Some say they are Hindu Pathans. That is why i would request you to remove all these ethnicity terms and not to use any ethnciity in these articles. Also Fareed30 is always trying to ban me, When he reverted my edits the first thing that i did was mention him on admin page. Thankyou Saladin1987 05:29, 21 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saladin1987 ( talk • contribs)
The block seems to have no effect on him. He is back to his ways once but I have advised him to seek an adopter, what do you think? Sohambanerjee1998 11:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 21:57, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
This isn't MRM related. User:Mr.Cappadocia is trolling Talk:Feminism and attacking a user whom they disagreed with in March 2013, on a completely different topic ( Talk:Misandry) [15] [16]. Please note this user has never edited the Feminism article. They are either VERY confused or trolling with a capital T. The attacks on Binskternet are violating WP:TPG, WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL and WP:NOT. I'm tempted to say its also breaching WP:SPIDERMAN. Could you keep an eye on this?-- Cailil talk 16:53, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi I want to do the right things, but need some help. A user swore here. [19]
I posted this User name... please refrain from offensive language. See [20] [[User:Blade-of-the-South|Blade-of-the-South]( talk) 23:55, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Another editor removed my post and the swearing is still there on [21] Russia holds its ground. Q. are editors allowed to remove my talk posts. I thought that was a no no. And is using the F word OK? Blade-of-the-South ( talk) 02:26, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
User:John seems bent on removing specific tabloid format sources previously decided to be reliable for BLPs from a great many articles -- asserting that "tabloid format" is sufficient to call a source a "tabloid" and that "tabloids" are forbidden. If he were consistent on removing all tabloids, I think he might be making a WP:POINT of dome sort, but the number of places he is doing this is disruptive utterly. "Tabloid format" per se has nothing to do with being used on Wikipedia, but this looks like a jihad of some dort from here. I am still on Wikistrike, but ask you look into this behavior, which, as I said, I find disruptive to the nth degree. Collect ( talk) 12:00, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
@John: [22] no consensus to "ax the Daily Mail." [23] Daily Mail usable in BLPs other than for contentious claims. And then on a "case by case" basis. And, IIRC, you were involved in that discussion. [24] not a "tabloid" and useable as a reliable source. [25] "reasonably reliable." and so on. Although you had demurred, but did not gain consensus then or now. Cheers. And just to make sure no WP:POINT is made by anyone, I am now on Wikistrike on all general noticeboards, etc. as well as on general BLPs and other places. Good job!!!! Collect ( talk) 12:48, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
The Theory of Everything is currently filming. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.193.245.109 ( talk) 13:34, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm wondering what is the policy on IP edits on Syrian civil war topic articles? I was just reverted 2 times in 24h by an IP [26], though i'm not sure what to do with this - do we report and sanction IPs? Thanks. Greyshark09 ( talk) 14:55, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:John. Thank you. ~ Charmlet -talk- 18:10, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
I don't pretend to understand what you've removed, but regarding your edit summary: WP:ANI has no talk page in its own right :-O. --- Sluzzelin talk 01:28, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Talk:Noelia_-_Mind_Blown_(feat._Timbaland_%26_Adrian_Visby)#Contested_deletion ( Jerry Santa Monica ( talk) 02:10, 24 September 2013 (UTC))
The Admin's Barnstar | |
You're an awesome
administrator. Earlier I thought of Admins to be extremely serious with a ban imposed on them which forbids them to be funny. Your just the opposite, you are extremely pleasant to work with and I really do think that you should apply for
Cratship till then just keep on moppin' just like this!
Sohambanerjee1998 07:20, 22 September 2013 (UTC) |
Hi! This edit [ [29]] does not appear to be constructive, and I have reverted it. Your edit summary "this isn't even the ANI talk page" was incorrect - it is. ♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ (♥ Talk♥ ) 15:24, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm not linking names as I don't want them to come and infest your page. At the end of the DR case he filed, Sarower Sigh Bhati stated he was leaving Wikipedia. Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Hridayeshwar_Singh_Bhati Yesterday, a new editor showed up at Talk:Hridayeshwar Singh Bhati, Dr Meenakshi Kanwar, exhibiting the same sort of behavior.
I can provide diffs for all these. Bhati's contributions can be seen starting here. He has been involved in a SPI here. Is this enough for a CU on Kanwar? If not, what do you recommend? BTW, Bhati is still editing. -- NeilN talk to me 15:37, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Finally looked at this. I'm including three accounts in this mess. It's not clear to me how much of this is sock puppetry and how much of it is meat puppetry, but both are sanctionable. I almost blocked all three, but after thinking about it some more, I'd prefer that one of you open a report at SPI. Make sure you explain that meat puppetry might be involved. Also, Sarower Sigh Bhati is the oldest account and therefore should be named as the master. I may yet block them on my own. If you file a report, please let me know that you've done so. Also, if there is continuing disruption, please give me a heads up. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 23:48, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of this. Kanwar is trying to appeal her block with the usual regard for directions. -- NeilN talk to me 02:34, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
You said you needed more sources for the Cosplay sections for Django Unchained. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Django_Unchained&action=history
What would you consider 'reliable' secondary sources? There wont be many articles about it, but there are plenty of pictures available. Would links to some taken from comic con work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.89.60.29 ( talk) 15:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I just noticed that this user who you blocked the other day is now evading his block and making contentious edits with a new IP. Both IPs can be traced to Denver, Colorado, and in both cases the IP user is edit warring on the NRA and Gun politics articles. ROG5728 ( talk) 19:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Jezebel'sPonyo
bons mots has given you a
Cheeseburger! Cheeseburgers promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Cheeseburger, whether it be someone you've had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy eating!
We can't have you starving now can we?
Spread the goodness of Cheeseburgers by adding {{ subst:Cheeseburger}} to their talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cheeseburger on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:burger-munch}}!
[31] User Farolif on the Hun Sen article is reverting me. I am thinking it is o.k. to use what I have used on the article page and he is saying no, that it is not neutral. Its a legit news source and they say it, and it updates the situation of that particular person in that particular place [32] so I paraphrased it and used it. I noticed a previous action you made with that person and am wondering if what he is doing now constitutes a kind of creeping edit war. I asked him to talk page the issue but no luck on that. Earl King Jr. ( talk) 06:18, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Bbb23. You blocked the dynamic 201.215.187.159 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) for three months on 13 August; mainly, as you said, because of their sock puppetry threat. Yeah... I think 200.73.232.97 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) is the same person, per WP:DUCK: same ISP, same city, same charm. See their talkpage. Unfortunately, those two can't be blocked as a "range", it would be massive. How are you on range blocks? Is there anything we can do, other than blocking 200.73.232.97 as well? (I'm holding off on that until they respond to me, but considering their reception of User:Thomas.W, I'm not expecting a very warm welcome.) What annoys me is that 201.215.187.159 stopped editing on 13 August (obviously) and 200.73.232.97 didn't start until 26 September. I just bet there were some little duckies in between, and will be more. Bishonen | talk 20:30, 28 September 2013 (UTC).
As you have effectively forbidden discussion of this on the Men's Rights Movement talk page, I believe it is entirely appropriate to take the issue up on your talk page. As I'm sure you are aware, [[WP::Label]] states that a label should not be used unless it is "widely" so used by RS. In practice, the label "terrorist" is applied when one or more governments apply the label -- e.g. Al Qaeda, Tamil Tigers, Hamas, etc. I would ask you to apply the same standard to the Men's Rights Movement article. That is, if one or more governments have stated that the MRM is "mysogynist", it would be appropriate to use the label in the lede of the article. Otherwise, it would not. I request that you apply the policy the same way it is applied elsewhere on Wikipedia. Thank you. William Jockusch ( talk) 04:03, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Changes to WP:NBOX/ WP:NBOXING have been discussed at length at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#Notability discussion, and I believe a consensus has been reached. Best Regards. DynamoDegsy ( talk) 15:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
While this fails WP:NFF, the topic of a planned sequel IS beginning to be spoken about in reliable sources. [34] Yes, the article is TOO SOON, but being sourcable is not a speedy-able film topic. Best, Schmidt, Michael Q. 10:28, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23. I hope everything is well with you and yours. Sorry for the trouble, but since you are an SPI clerk I would like to ask your opinion about IP sock tagging. Please see: Mass reverting of IP sock tags of K-pop articles and associated discussion at Please do not mass-revert IP sock tags. Whenever you have the time, please let me know your opinion regarding the best way forward in this case. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 01:58, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your message letting me know about the speedy deletion of The Woven Thread production company page I created. I understand your reasons for doing so, but I'd like to ask a couple of questions. I checked to see that there were other similar pages for independent television production companies in Scotland and found several: The Comedy Unit, Effingee Productions are two examples, both of which make comedy in Scotland, as does The Woven Thread. In fact effingee hasn't made any television for 5 years, but The Woven Thread is a new company and will make programmes for the forseeable future. My question is this: At what point is a company big enough to warrant a page? Thanks for your help--— Preceding unsigned comment added by MrMHines ( talk • contribs) 09:36, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
I truest you as an admin and @ Drmies: too and know you always post your own views. I also try to do so. In Commons, my arguments are being rejected thrice. No one, not a single admin, is supporting my points there and someone has told, I am wasting their time. Still, I can not understand where I am wrong.
The point I am trying to say them— when we don't know copyright status of an image/content in a country, our attempt should be to find it. "We don't know", "Commons does not have any information" — these should not be reason to keep content here. Please help me to understand where I am wrong here. Commons thread: Commons:Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#My_disappointment:_TOO_and_India Tito☸ Dutta 12:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bbb. see this 3RR closure, where you wrote 36 hours as the result. Did you forget to issue the block? I had previously done a 48 hour block (though not per the 3RR board) because the Latin America article is on my watchlist and I noticed the revert war. It does not seem that the user is paying any attention. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 05:03, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by William Jockusch ( talk • contribs) 20:13, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Your closing of the ANI (1) was completely unjustified. My concern was simple and plainly stated. Bink kept hounding me by repeatedly posting erroneous allegations of misconduct on my talk page, after I told him not to. I didn't make any of the distracting/off-topic sub-threads, so it makes no sense to hold them against my original complaint. Your doing so also sets a terrible precedent for future legitimate ANIs complaints, implying that posting a bunch of inane, off-topic stuff is an effective strategy to derail them. Your inability or unwillingness to distinguish between my (concise and clear) original complaint, and the distracting off-topic threads that follow, is highly disappointing, particularly given your admin status. Steeletrap ( talk) 20:22, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
On September 6 at 16:42 Binksternet posted an edit-warring template on your talk page about Hans-Hermann Hoppe. At that point you had made two reverts on the article in the preceding 24 hours, one at 6:30 and one at 16:39. Your statement in response that you had made only one over "several weeks" was incorrect. As for Binksternet's reverts, he was claiming a BLP exemption. If you believed there was no basis for that exemption, the appropriate thing would have been to take him to WP:AN3.
Binsternet left two more edit-warring templates on your talk page, one on September 27 at 13:37, and one on September 29 at 4:56. The first was again about the Hoppe article, and the second was about Murray Rothbard. With respect to the Hoppe article, you had made one revert in the preceding 24 hours but had made multiple reverts over time, which could arguably be interpreted as edit warring, even without a breach, or imminent breach, of WP:3RR. With respect to the Rothbard article, which is now locked, you had made two reverts in the 24 hours preceding the warning.
I see some overzealousness on Binksternet's part, but that's without looking at the underlying content disputes. My suspicion is you will get nowhere at ANI with the conduct issue until you resolve through consensus the disputes that you and others have on these rather contentious articles.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 22:59, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Jorge Erdely Graham". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Ajax F¡ore talk 03:46, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi there
I set up the Sylvanvale Disability Services page which you deleted earlier today.
I don't completely understand the deletion codes that you attached (I'm new at this) and just wondering what I have to do to make that page pass the criteria? Seems to be a lot less worthy pages that survive than that. I drafted it based on the Plan page as it is a similar organisation and I don't see why the Sylvanvale page was any different than that one.
Would love some advice.
Cheers
Sean — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seanjhross ( talk • contribs) 12:25, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23,
it looks like User:Danrolo (if you can remember?) has returned. 201.239.253.57 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) edits masses of political party articles (mainly the infoboxes), adding unsourced information (mainly about their ideological orientation). He is even having an edit war with another user across several Chilean parties. The IP is based in Chile, Danrolo's homeland. Should I file a formal SPI or can you just block the IP for being an obvious sockpuppet of Danrolo's? Kind regards -- RJFF ( talk) 15:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
My bad and apologies for that error. I read the SPI Clerking guide and interpreted it the wrong way here. -- SMS Talk 07:20, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
I just found out from someone that TheOldJacobite has been doing a series of edit warring on articles Raging Bull and The Departed. Check out the revision of those articles if you want to see this. BattleshipMan ( talk) 17:06, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Theonesean#The League of Peace Foundation. the one sean 21:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
I thought A-7 was for something that was not notable. What would be the correct tag in this case? The page is for a totally unnoteworthy object as far as I can see. Antiqueight confer 16:04, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
... a site like this (there are many bad photos, I started creating my family tree, the work is incomplete). Your action was perfect. They impersonated Wiki Management US too. One thing I always say, if a user is puzzled and politely confesses that he can not understand things here, his critical errors might be ignored for sometime. I'm giving my own example, very foolish this and this you'll find the user (I) could not understand where to sign, how to talk etc, but simultaneously trying to learn things. I ask others to see these posts and foolish help requests and then ask to observe the improvement I have done in last two years from that point. One should not be ashamed to ask help or confess mistakes. But, if a user tries be over-smart or attempts to game the system by impersonating Wikimedia US, that is unacceptable. -- Tito☸ Dutta 18:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I've replied. I hope that is clear - if you need anything else, please let me know. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 19:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
The Original Barnstar | |
Sir you have deleted my page New R. S. J. Public School Senior Secondary. Sir I request you to get it undelteted. I will be thankful to you. Pratham 09:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC) |
00:11, 5 October 2013 Bbb23 (talk | contribs) deleted page Như Quỳnh (actress) (A7: No explanation of significance (real person/animal/organization/web content/organized event))
Hi there, it has come to my attention that you have deleted the page Valerie Loo and I would like to request for you to undo the deletion. Valerie is a young and budding Singaporean artiste and she has a growing influence among Singaporeans after her involvement in the television program Campus SuperStar (season 4). It is vital for her to have a wiki page for people to find out more about her. Some of the other contestants do have articles about themselves as well thus we see no reason as to why her page was marked for deletion even though it has even more adequate references cited about her. Please do consider undoing the deletion. It seems that it has been marked for deletion as it wasn't clearly stated enough about her significance in the Singapore music and online industry. We will be happy to make any changes to the article after the undoing of the deletion so as to improve the article. Thank you. Happyglenshades ( talk) 03:10, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
I have been issued a warning for my edits on the page Seeman (director) though i had provided highly reputable citations for the same...and pro-separatist content has been restored on the page..I had pinged SpacemanSpiff regarding the same and he asked me to take the matter to you...wonder if you would be able to help?!
Thank You none-the-less *cheers* Arlok2005 ( talk) 19:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Johnny Squeaky ( talk · contribs) is continued to edit Soylent Green in evident violation of the consensus on the Talk page and without making any evident effort to gather consensus for their edit. As you warned them about this behavior before, it may be time to engage in stronger action. Please let me know if you have any questions. DonIago ( talk) 04:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bbb. Just now I saw this edit on my watchlist, which shows User:Turkishistorian once again adding blog-sourced information to this article (from http://dodecad.blogspot.com). Since you'd previously warned Turkishistorian on his talk page about a possible block, perhaps you want to take a look. In this case Turkishistorian is making reference to a Google Doc generated by the anonymous owner of the Dodecad blog. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 15:02, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Sir or Madame:
You have failed to cite WHAT in particular in my edits LACKS a source. There are plenty of sources throughout the article justifying the edits I made (LOOK at the links). Other edits are simply that a book is now published (before, the article said that something "will be published in July"...do you object to the idea that July has passed? Or do you object to the book being published, because you haven't bothered to look on Amazon?)
I do not appreciate my work being undone without ANY constructive criticism of WHAT is improper. Justify yourself or I will seek arbitration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballroom Dancer 001 ( talk • contribs) 23:21, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
You are clearly a little child. My "new-ness" is not logically relevant. My interest in Dr. Picart is not relevant to editing a Wikipedia page. You have no right to speak of "edit-wars" given that you refuse to answer questions about how to edit this properly. If you were an adult, you would address the specifics of my request; instead, you act like a child playing games. Her article will be edited for accuracy as opposed to your puerile behavior.
why did u delete my page? There are plenty of sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dante20000 ( talk • contribs) 01:32, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
I like your edit summary for the Wikipedia-article from 10 October: assuming these sources are reliable, they don't support the assertions... it is quite poetic. Soerfm ( talk) 10:10, 11 October 2013 (UTC) |
First of all Bbb23, thank you for intervening to this topic. A lot of edit warring was going on. I have reported this incident violation last night on article. I do not understand why I am on the warned user list, however I am fine with it. I try to abide the rules, made no more than 1 reverts per 24h and my only double edit was for template fix of my previous one (m). My edits were documented, referenced and discussed as per the topics raised in the relevant talk page. I will continue to contribute in a good faith manner. As a fairly new WP editor, if I did not go by the editing policy and did something wrong, I apologise and would like to ask you to point me to it, for future (avoidance) reference. Regards Ariskar ( talk) 20:12, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
For deleting Terry Tang and Siraj Awad within 10 minutes of my tagging them. Thanks. -- Jakob ( Scream about the things I've broken) 00:02, 12 October 2013 (UTC) |
This page should not be speedily deleted because... (All the copyright content has been removed and only reliable sources of wikipedia has been provoded,its an important article with so many relaible sources ,provided for that).. first see the article contents and discuss on talk page . dont delete it directly ,prsuming that it will be promotional again. just see the article first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitishkumartn ( talk • contribs) 15:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
I had mentioned in the Talk that the article is yet to be updated completely. Did you not read that? It isn't a promotion. The books are about a philosophy. Also he is Limca Book Record holder, its all yet to be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amru92 ( talk • contribs) 16:38, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
If I have to agree to the Wiki definition of a 'spam' then could you kindly advise me how to create a page for a to-be-released-Indian-movie under the "Upcoming Movie" category (to be released in a regional Language). Kindly be specific and do not jus redirect to a generic FAQ page pls! Your help and guidance would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funtoontalkies ( talk • contribs) 16:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your level head. Per a suggestion at the drama page, note: [35] Montanabw (talk) 17:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
It was nice to return from a walk and find it resolved, thank you, let's do content (and there was an infobox already, lovely) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
sir why havee u deleted the article it is one of hte biggst fest of india and one should no of it !! it is from the state goverment of delhi(capital of india ) >> ? what else you want to know ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrRAWATJI ( talk • contribs) 18:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
I need some advice whether we can include 1970 Syrian Corrective Revolution under the umbrella of Syrian civil war sanctions: on one hand it is clearly having to do with the modern Syrian government topics - the formation of modern Baathist party leadership under Assad family; but on the other hand it is quiet far away in the past and not directly has to do with the Syrian civil war; finally, if we go by ARBPIA-based guidelines - it would be included as a closely related topic. At first i did put the Syrian sanctions notice on the talk page, but now i'm not sure (so in the meanwhile i removed it).
Any way, there is currently a very aggressive editing there by some user [36], which made this article blocked twice by an administrator within a week. The question is - do you think 1RR of Syrian sanctions should apply to that article? If so, then the aggressive editor should be warned/blocked for 1RR. GreyShark ( dibra) 21:24, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
You deleted the page for David Butts. The creator was still working on the page and has references to verify notability. Can you please restore the page? -- Another Believer ( Talk) 22:47, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Why were these 2 pages deleted without giving the contributors (there were 3 contributors to these 2 articles) time to address your concern? How can we improve it so it will not be summarily deleted when we resubmit it? Hobsonlane ( talk) 23:48, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I see you have speedily deleted Complex infinity. I do not know what the previous contents was, but redirect to Infinity#Complex_analysis would be appropriate. Jmath666 ( talk) 03:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
The sports bios he's writing are poor, but actually look to be notable, and I'm seeing a number of constructive edits. I think this is an editor who is here to build, but doesn't know how we work, hence the edit warring. However, his comment of "فارسی متوجه میشید برادر؟ " made here looks to translate as "English maid found a brother" - perhaps an insult or personal attack? We need a Farsi-speaker to explain to him how we work and try and nip this in the bud. Giant Snowman 15:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
The Google bomb was the most notable thing in his campaign. It's even on Wikipedia's entry for Google bomb. Mentioning it here, with sources, is not vandalism and is not even negative for Craig James so much as it is negative for Internet yahoos.
So if you could stop deleting it, that would be super. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.28.150.80 ( talk) 22:42, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Since the mere coverage of it proves that it was notable, I'll just keep undoing your edit, since your objections are without merit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.28.150.77 ( talk) 16:01, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
I literally don't see where I violated the 1RR. I don't see where I removed or restored content, whether whole or in part, more than 1 time in a period of 24 hours. I am not challenging your observation, I just literally don't see it. Sopher99 ( talk) 18:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Here they are:
As you can see, that's six.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for undoing the last of the blocked user's edits. I was wary of doing it myself because I didn't want to violate 3RR. Appreciate your assistance. 1995hoo ( talk) 18:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Excuse me, you deleted the page without allowing me the chance to contest the deletion nomination or improve the page. Can you please restore the page, so I can provide the needed information? -- Sanya3 ( talk) 20:08, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Thanks for the formal warming to DigbyDalton FYI see followup post at ANI NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 15:56, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Contributions/AnddoX&offset=&limit=500&target=AnddoX
Same articles (Ninja Gaiden, Zelda and Metal Gear games), same kind of edits (particularily telling is the replacement of Ayane's infobox image, which was Anndo X obsession), created few weeks after AnddoX was indef banned. -- Niemti ( talk) 16:56, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Also F-Zero, Splinter Cell and Bayonetta games, etc. Absolutely AnddoX. -- Niemti ( talk) 17:05, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Is there a particular reason why you have put that message on my page? I'm aware its a contested area and don't really need reminding. have I transgressed some line? Sayerslle ( talk) 01:00, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Can you please check the users Sock puppet investigation archive please? Sohambanerjee1998 10:13, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind tips. However, please do not remove "controversy" section of this page as it is well documented that MPEG protested the producer of this film. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation.-- Dunforget ( talk) 00:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Cousin Terio is signifigant and the article does not deserve to be deleted. Terio is insanely popular. Do a google search for him and you will see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathgenious989 ( talk • contribs) 01:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Can you offer your opinion on which photo would be better for the Rebecca Housel Infobox in this discussion? If you are unable to, I understand; you don't have to reply to this message. Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 03:36, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23. CenterforIsraelEducation ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, Mini apolis 21:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bbb, if you should feel like playing sleuth to a complicated piece of original research, I've started the ball rolling at the BLP noticeboard regarding MS Mikhail Lermontov and Richard Prebble. I'm calling it quits for the day, but there's a lot of investigative journalism here, and it's not easy to separate reliable sources from an agenda. Anyway, there's no expectation that you dig into this any time soon, if at all, but you're very good at this sort of thing, and there may be talk page stalkers who take an interest as well. All that said, consider this is an opportunity to say hello, more than an attempt to complicate your life. I hope you're well. Cheers, JNW ( talk) 00:21, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
I wrote the material you removed based on an interview I did with Martha Johnson. Why was it taken down. If you need citation, I can provide it. I am new to this and could use help, not removing my material. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaronbadgley ( talk • contribs) 21:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
I, in turn, suggest that you familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policy, because it is quite obviously a violation of any number of content policies to categorize an organization under a category that more-or-less directly states that the organization is guilty of terrorism. There is no "consensus" issue to be raised here. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 03:33, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I think this (following [37] and [38] in the last 24 hours) violates both the spirit and the letter of the Syrian Civil War sanctions. When you get a chance, can you please follow up with the user? I will notify Blade shortly that I posted this here. VQuakr ( talk) 04:47, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi thanks for the heads up VQuakr. I can see why you might think the above but I did a lot of work which you changed en mass here [39] And I thought it was good material, which we had been talking about esp as the new editor Swawa came in with those points of his. This started when you edited out again en masse discussed edits that Swawa bought up and I put in. Here. [40]. I put them back in again and you changed it back again. I did some thinking. I was tempted to just revert, but took a leaf from what you did with your one edit removing mulitple disparate lines. (I can see how you removed all this material is a way to circumvent the one revert rule). I saw you had some points and reworked some of the material back in.
You seem to have issues with Swawa refs. On talk I suggested you take issue with a ref you dont think is reliable on the appropriate forum, rather than delete it without discussion. Please re read Podiaebbas comments in the 'Secret US intel' thread about refs. The two editors here and myself all hold the same view. You dont agree with us and keep changing the edits back. Its frustrating. Blade-of-the-South ( talk) 07:02, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
He's violated 1RR again, [41], [42]. I asked him to self-revert on his talk page and he refused. The second one was a similar revert to several others he has done in the last few days, so in my opinion it violates the spirit of WP:EW as well (admittedly, this time is less severe). As always, if you want me to start taking these to a noticeboard instead, I am happy to oblige. VQuakr ( talk) 04:02, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Bbb23 Please read my talk page where I replied, BTW I did this revert at 00:05, 25 October 2013 and its the only one today, yesterday I did one contiguous edit, thks for the heads up though. BTW I didnt refuse I mentioned it was the next UTC I edited meaning 1 revert per 24 hr period. If he had of mentioned that wasnt the rule, i would have reverted. That is ? was my understanding of how things work. 24 hr UTC time. Others seem to edit the same and if thats not the rule some are transgressing also incl Sayerslle & Rolf h nelson and VQuaker did the same here [43] by editing in a rolling 24 hr period with these reverts.
23:46, 25 September 2013 VQuakr (talk | contribs) . . (195,853 bytes) (-1,275)
19:34, 25 September 2013 VQuakr (talk | contribs) . . (191,057 bytes) (-582) . .
Blade-of-the-South talk 05:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, in the SSCS talk page I am trying to understand why people are picking and chosing some categories to bury in sub cats of subcats but not others. I feel like I am being personally insulted and targeted for comment rather than having the issue addressed. Could you please take a look and see if I'm crazy. I'm not trying to bait or fight, just understand why favorable cats are kept and unfavorable ones are buried in subcats. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sea_Shepherd_Conservation_Society#.22Eco-terrorism.22 I have asked the user a number of times to stop focusing on me but to address the issue of content I am trying to get at. 76.112.8.146 ( talk) 18:35, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Here was the Tally after slightly more discussion:
That was after more discussion just to be sure and should give you a clue as to what is really happened. The only thing that changed in that list from the beginning of the last round of edits was Gaijin who previously may not have made his preference as clear. It's about to be a moot point though because that cat is up for deletion. The conversation will soon shift yet again to the original question. Eco-terrorism on the main page or not. 76.112.8.146 ( talk) 01:11, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
There are multiple discussions. 1. Is Eco-terrorism an appropriate Category? Qwyxian and myself say yes, Aus, Epipe and North say no. 2. Should the category be listed on the main page of the sub cat page? (for which plenty of opinion and no policy has yet been cited other than we all agree that it shouldn't be both) Aus says sub cat page. North chose main page. I agree with main page. Qwyrx comment reflects that either would be appropriate. We should resolve these questions independently to avoid confusion. 76.112.8.146 ( talk) 18:19, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
@ AussieLegend: Could you please make your summary clearer on the article talk page? The phrase "Support removal of cat from article" is ambiguous as to what cat you're referring to. If my understanding above here is correct, then you should be saying that. The article keeps shifting. For example, right now both cats are in the article (the parent and the subcat). You're not going to get any clarity as to the consensus if your summary is not clear. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:40, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
How did I miss this? /info/en/?search=File:MV_Brigitte_Bardot_stern_view.jpg You were there and took this picture Aussie? You are a SSCS supporter? You were on their ships? Now when you say that you don't understand how removing a category "hides" it from the article I have a clearer picture why. I think it also gives me a more clear picture why you accuse me of adding a negative POV for quoting the news. If this is a topic that is near and dear to your heart, it might be a touch difficult to take a neutral perspective. Please consider that. I thought you were just an editor who was protecting his own edits. I apologize for that assumption Aussie. I still think you're a great editor don't get me wrong, WAY better than me for sure. But I think perhaps I am more nuetral. My vested interest is that I want an article that accurately reflects expert opinion. No more, no less. 76.112.8.146 ( talk) 01:23, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
I am an inexperienced content provider. May I respectfully ask why the link to Harper's Bazaar was deleted? This was quite a coup for Eve. Any advice you care to share will be appreciated. BTW, is there an easy way to insert my name and the timestamp? Thank you, in advance, for your assistance. User:Greenwayfriend 21:47 19 October 2013 (ET) —Preceding undated comment added 01:49, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Sentence about transsexual woman that I deleted and you reverted has a link to the Wikipedia page Trans_woman. That page lists many people, but does not list either Amazon Eve or Erika Ervin. There is a footnote to an interview on Access Hollywood without a link. There are several copies of the interview on YouTube. Voice Over: And she's had her fair share of taunts. Often, people accuse her of being a man. Amazon Eve: A lot of women who are this tall get this all the time, “Are you sure you are a woman?” It says that on my birth certificate. Many people (men) have difficulty with her size and strength (she's a personal trainer). The link in the text is not relevant. The interview addresses the issue of taunts. There are interviews in which she gets into the topics of being tall and of finding clothes and shoes. I don't think the sentence meets standards. It is just another taunt. May I remove it?-- 66.108.158.173 ( talk) 22:57, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
[Bbb23, I did not get a response to my posting on my talk.] I see that the correct citation template should have been "news." ( On the next item I made no edits. Since you took it out once, I did not want to show disrespect.) Ms. Roitfeld was appointed the global fashion editor of Harper's Bazaar this year. The referenced article is called an "editorial." The point she is making is that beautiful women and female models are diverse in many ways. I chose Johanssen because she is well known and is a typical beauty. I chose the other two because they are unusual in a way that is relevant to Amazon Eve's unusual characteristic of extreme height. Dell'Orefice is 82 years old and an active model--certainly not what one might expect. Similarly Sidibe is obese, although I thought "large" would be more appropriate. Amazon Eve is unusually tall. The other 21 models demonstrate other areas of diversity, but I thought Dell'Orefice and Sidibe were the best context into which to put Amazon Eve. If we can agree on what Roitfeld had in mind, then I think it is appropriate within the sentence to include, in parentheses, what makes other other two women special. Not everyone will know who they are nor take the time to follow the link. Again, I appreciate your assistance and input. I hope you feel that I am responding appropriately. I know I have a lot to learn. -- Greenwayfriend ( talk) 02:24, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansaldo_STS Please leave the revisions from 10/17/2013 (originally) and again on 10/21/2013. The company reorganized recently. The information is factual and can be verified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.165.27.130 ( talk) 17:59, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Does Anugoonj (festival) look the same as the deleted page Anugoonj to you? Jackmcbarn ( talk) 00:19, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
THANKS for the help !!
for your attention does user talk of two admins, look like same to you !!
ofcourse they are why not they do the same work !!
so page related with same event will be ofcourse similar in many aspects !!
regarding the copyright information event is organised by us so we have the copyright information !!
i have changed pages many times to meet wiki policies but every time they delete it without any proper reason !!
so let me ask why same types of pages still flourishing either delete all or shut down your job !!
no thanks !! my pleasure !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrRAWATJI ( talk • contribs) 11:55, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I've just debunkered (yep that's definitely a mystification of source) arguments against deletion, can you confirm an AfD is needed anyway? Thank you! -- Vituzzu ( talk) 11:32, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Bbb23, I would like to bring to your attention User:Priyadswami. This user is the same user who had been blocked (as User:Duarfimaws, User:Swamifraud and their related sock-puppets). This user's recent edits on Bochasanwasi_Shri_Akshar_Purushottam_Swaminarayan_Sanstha violates WP:BLPCRIME (on Priyadarshan Swami) and the edits need to be removed right away. The sources cited do not establish conviction. The user name also violates WP:REALNAME as it is identifiable to Priyadarshan Swami. I urge you to block this user immediately and protect the page against further disruption. Kapil.xerox ( talk) 13:16, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, it looks like the same individual who has been vandalizing articles related to Swaminarayan and Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha has created yet another sockpuppet named Bluespeakers. This sock along with its predecessors Swamifraud, Duarfimaws, Breadinglover, Sageorsun, Priyadaswami, and the numerous Detroit area/Wayne State University IP addresses continues to advance personal agenda by disregarding Wikipedia policies, violating consensus, and edit warring. Most recently, the user is reaching out to editors who are unfamiliar with the sock banning history to try to gain support. I filed the original (unsuccessful) sock report for Swamifraud several months ago and several other users have filed additional reports with more success. Another user has filed a sock puppet investigation today. Could you please assess? Thanks!
Anastomoses (
talk)
20:48, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Bluespeakers ( talk) 16:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello!
I have made a few attempts to clean up List of new religious movements, which is a list article with a long history of contention, topic bans, puppetry, even at least one major contributor who was de-sysoped. Unfortunately, I haven't been successful in the attempt at cleanup. I'm asking you to take a look at the recent activity on the article and the talk page. Although I have my own thoughts on what some of the issues are, I would rather get yours without my frustration bleeding through too heavily.
I am dropping this note for the most recently active admins I saw, and I am hopeful that those extra eyes will make a difference.
Thanks for considering it, cheers! -- Tgeairn ( talk) 21:58, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
That's closed now. Not sure why the formatting was so off, but it was just going to continue being opposed anyway, a pretty obvious snow/notnow. Wizardman 22:07, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23. Thanks for doing the necessary about Austrian Economics. You've even made the proper entry at WP:GS but in doing so you've taking in a side in the long-running controversy, whether new entries go at the bottom or at the top of the list. I had always assumed the top, and of course I'm right, but notice that the last Arbcom clerk to make an entry also used the top of Arbcom's list. Possibly the page could be enhanced with a written note just above each table to say which way the convention runs. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 02:49, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23 - You were right about the non-deletion of Carrie Keranen. I did some further research and she is more notable than what the page described. You did a good job on cleaning that page up. Take care. Dinkytown talk 17:19, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
I hope you don't feel I stepped on your toes, but I have gone ahead and revoked his talk page. I don't believe Retrolord has a desire to do anything other than play games at this point and engaging with him further is not likely to be productive. Beeblebrox ( talk) 19:02, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'm not sure if you're automatically notified but my reply comment to your /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Talk:Men.27s_rights_movement.2FArticle_probation could you reply either there or on my user page (not sure if I get automatic notification so I will check both) Thanks. Still not sure how you meant your calling username "lovely" but the substantive questions too in my comment, thanks. Maleliberation ( talk) 21:14, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for excellent ruling on Austrian economics. Is there a warning message template including your language - or can you or we make one - to put on relevant pages as necessary and refer people to that as a first step, rather than always referring to the ANI thread, general sanctions listing page for this issue, a noticeboard or you, depending on circumstances? We already need this because, as you can see at the top set of new diffs since shortly after you made your ruling where MilesMoney, a new editor, and a less frequent editor are having an increasingly heated debate with charges of Personal attacks. So need to know best approach. Thanks. Later note: Since I noticed even more of it as I continued, did put in this general note about my question to you. Talk:Ludwig_von_Mises_Institute#General_sanctions_have_been_applied. User:Carolmooredc 21:57, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Aussie is at it again. As soon as the lift came off of Sea Shepherd Conservation Society a 3rd editor (North) made an appropriate edit attempting to find solutions in the middle. Aussie immediately changed it back to exactly what it was before the lock. I brought it back the the other editor's edit (round about, chaning a bit) which Aussie reverted again. (and placed a warning on my talk page like it was my fault). Instead the next time I simply reverted to North's last edit instead of adding anything of my own and placed a warning on his. What is the next step if he wants it his way and no one else can take part in the decisions for that page? 76.112.8.146 ( talk) 17:57, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Just so you know. Obviously, the action I take depends on the user's response. Let me know if you disagree with anything. Best, m.o.p 00:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Good evening, Bbb. Your ANI closure on the LvMI threaad, as I understand, adopted a no-tolerance policy regarding future policy violations (both related to conduct or content) on LvMI pages. Some users seem to be using this precedent as an excuse to ban editors based on alleged past misdeeds. Here, we see a totally off-topic thread seeking to ban User:MilesMoney for a host of edits, often made several months ago, when he was a total noob. I ask you to look into this situation because it seems to run contrary to the spirit of the sanctions, which is to have uninvolved admins (not libertarian users who have had political disputes with Miles) heavily scrutinze not past conduct, but future conduct on LvMI-related pages. Steeletrap ( talk) 04:12, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
sean.hoyland asked for a source in the TALK page and i gave him the source. i have no clue why you deleted my answer.
be careful next time.
-- Dorpwnz ( talk) 07:21, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm petitioning for the restoration of the Voltari page. I understand there where a few issues with the initial page, but these were corrected: 1. "you may not edit on behalf of a company, group, institution, product, or website which relates to the entity in question" The page was significantly updated with a personal account. 2. "it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.linkedin.com/company/voltari" Again, the text was significantly rewritten with the addition of more history and background about the company. 3. A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events): again, the change should address this. If not, please provide an explanation so that I can understand why information and the history of a publicly traded company should not belong in an encyclopedia. If this is the case then similar companies such as Millennial Media and Velti do not belong either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redsighthound ( talk • contribs) 14:14, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Really, you are threatening me for what is a reasonable judgement call about CSD tagging? You are the only user that has ever raised such an issue with regard to pages I have tagged, and I have to say I find your threatening and aggressive attitude in this matter extremely disappointing. Honestly I don't think you deserve to be an admin. -- nonsense ferret 01:12, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I created a page for Coatsworth and Sons today, but you deleted it. It definitely exists, feel free to check facebook and like them to download their music so that you will know they are real and do in fact exist. Feel free to contact me directly about this at <censored/>. /info/en/?search=Coatsworth_and_Sons — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.20.23.5 ( talk) 04:23, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Just got an google alert that a page on Wikipedia had been made about our artist collective/studio, but when I followed the link I found it had already been deleted. For what reason? Advertising? We didn't make it. We haven't even been given any time to review the page ourselves. Why would you delete a page on an artist studio without consulting us first? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.47.173.147 ( talk) 02:12, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Although redlinks lack construction, they may designate requests to creations of articles they are applied to (such as to films and television series starring Zac Efron and Daniela Ruah, two articles I have edited for this reason in the first place), thus being OK. As for the disruptive editing, I added those redlinks, and you joined in by deleting them. As this action persisted, you have blocked me for about 1 week, and then I have decided to give up and have this conversation with you once my block had been lifted. Homechallenge55 ( talk) 15:31, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bbb, I'm not up to continuing to oversee this crap, which has consisted of several accounts attempting to inflate a school newspaper censorship news item. I've tried to trim it to its essence several times. Could you have a look, see what if anything requires mention here, and determine if page protection is merited? Now, back to resting. Cheers, JNW ( talk) 19:53, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23. We have added you to the list of clerks and subscribed you to the mailing list (info: WP:AC/C#clerks-l). Welcome, and I look forward to working with you! To adjust your subscription options for the mailing list, see the link at mail:clerks-l. The mailing list works in the usual way, and the address to which new mailing list threads can be sent is clerks-llists.wikimedia.org. Useful reading for new clerks is the procedures page, WP:AC/C/P, and the Committee's procedures page, WP:AC/P, but you will learn all the basic components of clerking on-the-job.
New clerks begin as a trainee, are listed as such at WP:AC/C#Personnel, and will remain so until they have learned all the aspects of the job. When you've finished training, which usually takes a couple of/a few months, then we'll propose to the Committee that you be made a full clerk. As a clerk, you'll need to check your e-mail regularly, as the mailing list is where the clerks co-ordinate (an on-wiki co-ordination page also exists but is not used nearly as much). If you've any questions at any point of your traineeship, simply post to the mailing list.
Lastly, it might be useful if you enter your timezone into WP:AC/C#Personnel (in the same format as the other members have), so that we can estimate when we will have clerks available each day; this is, of course, at your discretion. Again, welcome! Regards, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 00:18, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm recently working on the Iran-Iraq war article - there is edit warring ongoing in the past day and a half [62]. It seems Coltsfan, one of them, incorrectly issued an administrator noticeboard complaint on vandalism [63], later issuing WP:AN complaint (closed with no action taken) and now an RfC. It is however clear that one user clearly violated 3RR. Can you take a look? GreyShark ( dibra) 16:22, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hi there, sorry to bother you again but after you warned him to stop, Saladin1987 ( talk · contribs) is again removing sourced content from multiple pages [1] [2] [3] and POV pushing. [4] [5] He's just playing around and I'm certain that he doesn't care about being blocked because he is very likely using other accounts. See also here. As for me, I'm a neutral and serious editor who enjoys doing complex research on subjects so you should know how I feel when people such as Saladin1987 come to bother me.-- Fareed30 ( talk) 00:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi mate i am alreday having discussion with him on the talk page also i am having discussion with him on wikipedia admin page. but he seems to not respond to the talk page and is not ready to go for a consencus. He has removed my sources and placed his sources and In Anil Kapoor article he himself is using a youtube source and is against my youtube source. I would appreciate if you could ask him to leave ethnicity out of the article until proper consecus is acheieved. Also i have tried to stop him from edit warring by just removing the ethnicity but he keeps on editing it which is against the rules of Wikipedia and is called edit warring. He needs to use to talk pages for Prithviraj Kapoor Anil Kapoor Kapoor family Raj Kapoor Surinder Kapoor in order to achieve a consensus whether the disputed ethnicity needs to be added or not as i have placed many reliable sources on the talk pages of these articles which he seems to ignore.Saladin1987 05:11, 21 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saladin1987 ( talk • contribs)
Hi also i have removed the ethnicity of Anil kapoor and have started a conversaton on the talk pages i.e [ [6]] as the reliable source that he is using is a youtube so as mine. In the case of Prithviraj Kapoor i havent changed the article and i have started conversation on the talk page i.e [ [7]] and i have placed many sourced links but Fareed30 hasnt responded to those. In case of Kapoor Family a previous concensus was acheived but he removed it and placed his version , i have started a converstaion there too [ [8]] We are also having converstaion on [ [9]] Admin talk page and all he demands is my ban. When i am not even doing edit warring, its him who keeps on reverting the articles by placing disputed ethnicities in them for example [ [10]] [ [11]] [ [12]] [ [13]] [ [14]]
Now from above it is clear that all he does is chnage the ethnicity in the articles when the ethnciity is completely in conflict. Some sources say they are Punjabi Some say they are Hindu Pathans. That is why i would request you to remove all these ethnicity terms and not to use any ethnciity in these articles. Also Fareed30 is always trying to ban me, When he reverted my edits the first thing that i did was mention him on admin page. Thankyou Saladin1987 05:29, 21 September 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saladin1987 ( talk • contribs)
The block seems to have no effect on him. He is back to his ways once but I have advised him to seek an adopter, what do you think? Sohambanerjee1998 11:28, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 21:57, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
This isn't MRM related. User:Mr.Cappadocia is trolling Talk:Feminism and attacking a user whom they disagreed with in March 2013, on a completely different topic ( Talk:Misandry) [15] [16]. Please note this user has never edited the Feminism article. They are either VERY confused or trolling with a capital T. The attacks on Binskternet are violating WP:TPG, WP:AGF, WP:CIVIL and WP:NOT. I'm tempted to say its also breaching WP:SPIDERMAN. Could you keep an eye on this?-- Cailil talk 16:53, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi I want to do the right things, but need some help. A user swore here. [19]
I posted this User name... please refrain from offensive language. See [20] [[User:Blade-of-the-South|Blade-of-the-South]( talk) 23:55, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Another editor removed my post and the swearing is still there on [21] Russia holds its ground. Q. are editors allowed to remove my talk posts. I thought that was a no no. And is using the F word OK? Blade-of-the-South ( talk) 02:26, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
User:John seems bent on removing specific tabloid format sources previously decided to be reliable for BLPs from a great many articles -- asserting that "tabloid format" is sufficient to call a source a "tabloid" and that "tabloids" are forbidden. If he were consistent on removing all tabloids, I think he might be making a WP:POINT of dome sort, but the number of places he is doing this is disruptive utterly. "Tabloid format" per se has nothing to do with being used on Wikipedia, but this looks like a jihad of some dort from here. I am still on Wikistrike, but ask you look into this behavior, which, as I said, I find disruptive to the nth degree. Collect ( talk) 12:00, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
@John: [22] no consensus to "ax the Daily Mail." [23] Daily Mail usable in BLPs other than for contentious claims. And then on a "case by case" basis. And, IIRC, you were involved in that discussion. [24] not a "tabloid" and useable as a reliable source. [25] "reasonably reliable." and so on. Although you had demurred, but did not gain consensus then or now. Cheers. And just to make sure no WP:POINT is made by anyone, I am now on Wikistrike on all general noticeboards, etc. as well as on general BLPs and other places. Good job!!!! Collect ( talk) 12:48, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
The Theory of Everything is currently filming. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.193.245.109 ( talk) 13:34, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm wondering what is the policy on IP edits on Syrian civil war topic articles? I was just reverted 2 times in 24h by an IP [26], though i'm not sure what to do with this - do we report and sanction IPs? Thanks. Greyshark09 ( talk) 14:55, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:John. Thank you. ~ Charmlet -talk- 18:10, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
I don't pretend to understand what you've removed, but regarding your edit summary: WP:ANI has no talk page in its own right :-O. --- Sluzzelin talk 01:28, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Talk:Noelia_-_Mind_Blown_(feat._Timbaland_%26_Adrian_Visby)#Contested_deletion ( Jerry Santa Monica ( talk) 02:10, 24 September 2013 (UTC))
The Admin's Barnstar | |
You're an awesome
administrator. Earlier I thought of Admins to be extremely serious with a ban imposed on them which forbids them to be funny. Your just the opposite, you are extremely pleasant to work with and I really do think that you should apply for
Cratship till then just keep on moppin' just like this!
Sohambanerjee1998 07:20, 22 September 2013 (UTC) |
Hi! This edit [ [29]] does not appear to be constructive, and I have reverted it. Your edit summary "this isn't even the ANI talk page" was incorrect - it is. ♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ (♥ Talk♥ ) 15:24, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
I'm not linking names as I don't want them to come and infest your page. At the end of the DR case he filed, Sarower Sigh Bhati stated he was leaving Wikipedia. Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Hridayeshwar_Singh_Bhati Yesterday, a new editor showed up at Talk:Hridayeshwar Singh Bhati, Dr Meenakshi Kanwar, exhibiting the same sort of behavior.
I can provide diffs for all these. Bhati's contributions can be seen starting here. He has been involved in a SPI here. Is this enough for a CU on Kanwar? If not, what do you recommend? BTW, Bhati is still editing. -- NeilN talk to me 15:37, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Finally looked at this. I'm including three accounts in this mess. It's not clear to me how much of this is sock puppetry and how much of it is meat puppetry, but both are sanctionable. I almost blocked all three, but after thinking about it some more, I'd prefer that one of you open a report at SPI. Make sure you explain that meat puppetry might be involved. Also, Sarower Sigh Bhati is the oldest account and therefore should be named as the master. I may yet block them on my own. If you file a report, please let me know that you've done so. Also, if there is continuing disruption, please give me a heads up. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 23:48, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of this. Kanwar is trying to appeal her block with the usual regard for directions. -- NeilN talk to me 02:34, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
You said you needed more sources for the Cosplay sections for Django Unchained. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Django_Unchained&action=history
What would you consider 'reliable' secondary sources? There wont be many articles about it, but there are plenty of pictures available. Would links to some taken from comic con work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.89.60.29 ( talk) 15:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I just noticed that this user who you blocked the other day is now evading his block and making contentious edits with a new IP. Both IPs can be traced to Denver, Colorado, and in both cases the IP user is edit warring on the NRA and Gun politics articles. ROG5728 ( talk) 19:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Jezebel'sPonyo
bons mots has given you a
Cheeseburger! Cheeseburgers promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Cheeseburger, whether it be someone you've had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy eating!
We can't have you starving now can we?
Spread the goodness of Cheeseburgers by adding {{ subst:Cheeseburger}} to their talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cheeseburger on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:burger-munch}}!
[31] User Farolif on the Hun Sen article is reverting me. I am thinking it is o.k. to use what I have used on the article page and he is saying no, that it is not neutral. Its a legit news source and they say it, and it updates the situation of that particular person in that particular place [32] so I paraphrased it and used it. I noticed a previous action you made with that person and am wondering if what he is doing now constitutes a kind of creeping edit war. I asked him to talk page the issue but no luck on that. Earl King Jr. ( talk) 06:18, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Bbb23. You blocked the dynamic 201.215.187.159 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) for three months on 13 August; mainly, as you said, because of their sock puppetry threat. Yeah... I think 200.73.232.97 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS) is the same person, per WP:DUCK: same ISP, same city, same charm. See their talkpage. Unfortunately, those two can't be blocked as a "range", it would be massive. How are you on range blocks? Is there anything we can do, other than blocking 200.73.232.97 as well? (I'm holding off on that until they respond to me, but considering their reception of User:Thomas.W, I'm not expecting a very warm welcome.) What annoys me is that 201.215.187.159 stopped editing on 13 August (obviously) and 200.73.232.97 didn't start until 26 September. I just bet there were some little duckies in between, and will be more. Bishonen | talk 20:30, 28 September 2013 (UTC).
As you have effectively forbidden discussion of this on the Men's Rights Movement talk page, I believe it is entirely appropriate to take the issue up on your talk page. As I'm sure you are aware, [[WP::Label]] states that a label should not be used unless it is "widely" so used by RS. In practice, the label "terrorist" is applied when one or more governments apply the label -- e.g. Al Qaeda, Tamil Tigers, Hamas, etc. I would ask you to apply the same standard to the Men's Rights Movement article. That is, if one or more governments have stated that the MRM is "mysogynist", it would be appropriate to use the label in the lede of the article. Otherwise, it would not. I request that you apply the policy the same way it is applied elsewhere on Wikipedia. Thank you. William Jockusch ( talk) 04:03, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Changes to WP:NBOX/ WP:NBOXING have been discussed at length at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boxing#Notability discussion, and I believe a consensus has been reached. Best Regards. DynamoDegsy ( talk) 15:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
While this fails WP:NFF, the topic of a planned sequel IS beginning to be spoken about in reliable sources. [34] Yes, the article is TOO SOON, but being sourcable is not a speedy-able film topic. Best, Schmidt, Michael Q. 10:28, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23. I hope everything is well with you and yours. Sorry for the trouble, but since you are an SPI clerk I would like to ask your opinion about IP sock tagging. Please see: Mass reverting of IP sock tags of K-pop articles and associated discussion at Please do not mass-revert IP sock tags. Whenever you have the time, please let me know your opinion regarding the best way forward in this case. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. λόγος πράξις 01:58, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your message letting me know about the speedy deletion of The Woven Thread production company page I created. I understand your reasons for doing so, but I'd like to ask a couple of questions. I checked to see that there were other similar pages for independent television production companies in Scotland and found several: The Comedy Unit, Effingee Productions are two examples, both of which make comedy in Scotland, as does The Woven Thread. In fact effingee hasn't made any television for 5 years, but The Woven Thread is a new company and will make programmes for the forseeable future. My question is this: At what point is a company big enough to warrant a page? Thanks for your help--— Preceding unsigned comment added by MrMHines ( talk • contribs) 09:36, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
I truest you as an admin and @ Drmies: too and know you always post your own views. I also try to do so. In Commons, my arguments are being rejected thrice. No one, not a single admin, is supporting my points there and someone has told, I am wasting their time. Still, I can not understand where I am wrong.
The point I am trying to say them— when we don't know copyright status of an image/content in a country, our attempt should be to find it. "We don't know", "Commons does not have any information" — these should not be reason to keep content here. Please help me to understand where I am wrong here. Commons thread: Commons:Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#My_disappointment:_TOO_and_India Tito☸ Dutta 12:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bbb. see this 3RR closure, where you wrote 36 hours as the result. Did you forget to issue the block? I had previously done a 48 hour block (though not per the 3RR board) because the Latin America article is on my watchlist and I noticed the revert war. It does not seem that the user is paying any attention. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 05:03, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by William Jockusch ( talk • contribs) 20:13, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Your closing of the ANI (1) was completely unjustified. My concern was simple and plainly stated. Bink kept hounding me by repeatedly posting erroneous allegations of misconduct on my talk page, after I told him not to. I didn't make any of the distracting/off-topic sub-threads, so it makes no sense to hold them against my original complaint. Your doing so also sets a terrible precedent for future legitimate ANIs complaints, implying that posting a bunch of inane, off-topic stuff is an effective strategy to derail them. Your inability or unwillingness to distinguish between my (concise and clear) original complaint, and the distracting off-topic threads that follow, is highly disappointing, particularly given your admin status. Steeletrap ( talk) 20:22, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
On September 6 at 16:42 Binksternet posted an edit-warring template on your talk page about Hans-Hermann Hoppe. At that point you had made two reverts on the article in the preceding 24 hours, one at 6:30 and one at 16:39. Your statement in response that you had made only one over "several weeks" was incorrect. As for Binksternet's reverts, he was claiming a BLP exemption. If you believed there was no basis for that exemption, the appropriate thing would have been to take him to WP:AN3.
Binsternet left two more edit-warring templates on your talk page, one on September 27 at 13:37, and one on September 29 at 4:56. The first was again about the Hoppe article, and the second was about Murray Rothbard. With respect to the Hoppe article, you had made one revert in the preceding 24 hours but had made multiple reverts over time, which could arguably be interpreted as edit warring, even without a breach, or imminent breach, of WP:3RR. With respect to the Rothbard article, which is now locked, you had made two reverts in the 24 hours preceding the warning.
I see some overzealousness on Binksternet's part, but that's without looking at the underlying content disputes. My suspicion is you will get nowhere at ANI with the conduct issue until you resolve through consensus the disputes that you and others have on these rather contentious articles.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 22:59, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Jorge Erdely Graham". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Ajax F¡ore talk 03:46, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi there
I set up the Sylvanvale Disability Services page which you deleted earlier today.
I don't completely understand the deletion codes that you attached (I'm new at this) and just wondering what I have to do to make that page pass the criteria? Seems to be a lot less worthy pages that survive than that. I drafted it based on the Plan page as it is a similar organisation and I don't see why the Sylvanvale page was any different than that one.
Would love some advice.
Cheers
Sean — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seanjhross ( talk • contribs) 12:25, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23,
it looks like User:Danrolo (if you can remember?) has returned. 201.239.253.57 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) edits masses of political party articles (mainly the infoboxes), adding unsourced information (mainly about their ideological orientation). He is even having an edit war with another user across several Chilean parties. The IP is based in Chile, Danrolo's homeland. Should I file a formal SPI or can you just block the IP for being an obvious sockpuppet of Danrolo's? Kind regards -- RJFF ( talk) 15:26, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
My bad and apologies for that error. I read the SPI Clerking guide and interpreted it the wrong way here. -- SMS Talk 07:20, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
I just found out from someone that TheOldJacobite has been doing a series of edit warring on articles Raging Bull and The Departed. Check out the revision of those articles if you want to see this. BattleshipMan ( talk) 17:06, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at User talk:Theonesean#The League of Peace Foundation. the one sean 21:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
I thought A-7 was for something that was not notable. What would be the correct tag in this case? The page is for a totally unnoteworthy object as far as I can see. Antiqueight confer 16:04, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
... a site like this (there are many bad photos, I started creating my family tree, the work is incomplete). Your action was perfect. They impersonated Wiki Management US too. One thing I always say, if a user is puzzled and politely confesses that he can not understand things here, his critical errors might be ignored for sometime. I'm giving my own example, very foolish this and this you'll find the user (I) could not understand where to sign, how to talk etc, but simultaneously trying to learn things. I ask others to see these posts and foolish help requests and then ask to observe the improvement I have done in last two years from that point. One should not be ashamed to ask help or confess mistakes. But, if a user tries be over-smart or attempts to game the system by impersonating Wikimedia US, that is unacceptable. -- Tito☸ Dutta 18:59, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I've replied. I hope that is clear - if you need anything else, please let me know. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 19:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
The Original Barnstar | |
Sir you have deleted my page New R. S. J. Public School Senior Secondary. Sir I request you to get it undelteted. I will be thankful to you. Pratham 09:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC) |
00:11, 5 October 2013 Bbb23 (talk | contribs) deleted page Như Quỳnh (actress) (A7: No explanation of significance (real person/animal/organization/web content/organized event))
Hi there, it has come to my attention that you have deleted the page Valerie Loo and I would like to request for you to undo the deletion. Valerie is a young and budding Singaporean artiste and she has a growing influence among Singaporeans after her involvement in the television program Campus SuperStar (season 4). It is vital for her to have a wiki page for people to find out more about her. Some of the other contestants do have articles about themselves as well thus we see no reason as to why her page was marked for deletion even though it has even more adequate references cited about her. Please do consider undoing the deletion. It seems that it has been marked for deletion as it wasn't clearly stated enough about her significance in the Singapore music and online industry. We will be happy to make any changes to the article after the undoing of the deletion so as to improve the article. Thank you. Happyglenshades ( talk) 03:10, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
I have been issued a warning for my edits on the page Seeman (director) though i had provided highly reputable citations for the same...and pro-separatist content has been restored on the page..I had pinged SpacemanSpiff regarding the same and he asked me to take the matter to you...wonder if you would be able to help?!
Thank You none-the-less *cheers* Arlok2005 ( talk) 19:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Johnny Squeaky ( talk · contribs) is continued to edit Soylent Green in evident violation of the consensus on the Talk page and without making any evident effort to gather consensus for their edit. As you warned them about this behavior before, it may be time to engage in stronger action. Please let me know if you have any questions. DonIago ( talk) 04:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bbb. Just now I saw this edit on my watchlist, which shows User:Turkishistorian once again adding blog-sourced information to this article (from http://dodecad.blogspot.com). Since you'd previously warned Turkishistorian on his talk page about a possible block, perhaps you want to take a look. In this case Turkishistorian is making reference to a Google Doc generated by the anonymous owner of the Dodecad blog. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 15:02, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Sir or Madame:
You have failed to cite WHAT in particular in my edits LACKS a source. There are plenty of sources throughout the article justifying the edits I made (LOOK at the links). Other edits are simply that a book is now published (before, the article said that something "will be published in July"...do you object to the idea that July has passed? Or do you object to the book being published, because you haven't bothered to look on Amazon?)
I do not appreciate my work being undone without ANY constructive criticism of WHAT is improper. Justify yourself or I will seek arbitration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballroom Dancer 001 ( talk • contribs) 23:21, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
You are clearly a little child. My "new-ness" is not logically relevant. My interest in Dr. Picart is not relevant to editing a Wikipedia page. You have no right to speak of "edit-wars" given that you refuse to answer questions about how to edit this properly. If you were an adult, you would address the specifics of my request; instead, you act like a child playing games. Her article will be edited for accuracy as opposed to your puerile behavior.
why did u delete my page? There are plenty of sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dante20000 ( talk • contribs) 01:32, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
I like your edit summary for the Wikipedia-article from 10 October: assuming these sources are reliable, they don't support the assertions... it is quite poetic. Soerfm ( talk) 10:10, 11 October 2013 (UTC) |
First of all Bbb23, thank you for intervening to this topic. A lot of edit warring was going on. I have reported this incident violation last night on article. I do not understand why I am on the warned user list, however I am fine with it. I try to abide the rules, made no more than 1 reverts per 24h and my only double edit was for template fix of my previous one (m). My edits were documented, referenced and discussed as per the topics raised in the relevant talk page. I will continue to contribute in a good faith manner. As a fairly new WP editor, if I did not go by the editing policy and did something wrong, I apologise and would like to ask you to point me to it, for future (avoidance) reference. Regards Ariskar ( talk) 20:12, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
For deleting Terry Tang and Siraj Awad within 10 minutes of my tagging them. Thanks. -- Jakob ( Scream about the things I've broken) 00:02, 12 October 2013 (UTC) |
This page should not be speedily deleted because... (All the copyright content has been removed and only reliable sources of wikipedia has been provoded,its an important article with so many relaible sources ,provided for that).. first see the article contents and discuss on talk page . dont delete it directly ,prsuming that it will be promotional again. just see the article first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nitishkumartn ( talk • contribs) 15:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
I had mentioned in the Talk that the article is yet to be updated completely. Did you not read that? It isn't a promotion. The books are about a philosophy. Also he is Limca Book Record holder, its all yet to be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amru92 ( talk • contribs) 16:38, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
If I have to agree to the Wiki definition of a 'spam' then could you kindly advise me how to create a page for a to-be-released-Indian-movie under the "Upcoming Movie" category (to be released in a regional Language). Kindly be specific and do not jus redirect to a generic FAQ page pls! Your help and guidance would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funtoontalkies ( talk • contribs) 16:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your level head. Per a suggestion at the drama page, note: [35] Montanabw (talk) 17:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
It was nice to return from a walk and find it resolved, thank you, let's do content (and there was an infobox already, lovely) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
sir why havee u deleted the article it is one of hte biggst fest of india and one should no of it !! it is from the state goverment of delhi(capital of india ) >> ? what else you want to know ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrRAWATJI ( talk • contribs) 18:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
I need some advice whether we can include 1970 Syrian Corrective Revolution under the umbrella of Syrian civil war sanctions: on one hand it is clearly having to do with the modern Syrian government topics - the formation of modern Baathist party leadership under Assad family; but on the other hand it is quiet far away in the past and not directly has to do with the Syrian civil war; finally, if we go by ARBPIA-based guidelines - it would be included as a closely related topic. At first i did put the Syrian sanctions notice on the talk page, but now i'm not sure (so in the meanwhile i removed it).
Any way, there is currently a very aggressive editing there by some user [36], which made this article blocked twice by an administrator within a week. The question is - do you think 1RR of Syrian sanctions should apply to that article? If so, then the aggressive editor should be warned/blocked for 1RR. GreyShark ( dibra) 21:24, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
You deleted the page for David Butts. The creator was still working on the page and has references to verify notability. Can you please restore the page? -- Another Believer ( Talk) 22:47, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Why were these 2 pages deleted without giving the contributors (there were 3 contributors to these 2 articles) time to address your concern? How can we improve it so it will not be summarily deleted when we resubmit it? Hobsonlane ( talk) 23:48, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I see you have speedily deleted Complex infinity. I do not know what the previous contents was, but redirect to Infinity#Complex_analysis would be appropriate. Jmath666 ( talk) 03:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
The sports bios he's writing are poor, but actually look to be notable, and I'm seeing a number of constructive edits. I think this is an editor who is here to build, but doesn't know how we work, hence the edit warring. However, his comment of "فارسی متوجه میشید برادر؟ " made here looks to translate as "English maid found a brother" - perhaps an insult or personal attack? We need a Farsi-speaker to explain to him how we work and try and nip this in the bud. Giant Snowman 15:00, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
The Google bomb was the most notable thing in his campaign. It's even on Wikipedia's entry for Google bomb. Mentioning it here, with sources, is not vandalism and is not even negative for Craig James so much as it is negative for Internet yahoos.
So if you could stop deleting it, that would be super. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.28.150.80 ( talk) 22:42, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Since the mere coverage of it proves that it was notable, I'll just keep undoing your edit, since your objections are without merit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.28.150.77 ( talk) 16:01, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
I literally don't see where I violated the 1RR. I don't see where I removed or restored content, whether whole or in part, more than 1 time in a period of 24 hours. I am not challenging your observation, I just literally don't see it. Sopher99 ( talk) 18:15, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Here they are:
As you can see, that's six.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for undoing the last of the blocked user's edits. I was wary of doing it myself because I didn't want to violate 3RR. Appreciate your assistance. 1995hoo ( talk) 18:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Excuse me, you deleted the page without allowing me the chance to contest the deletion nomination or improve the page. Can you please restore the page, so I can provide the needed information? -- Sanya3 ( talk) 20:08, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Thanks for the formal warming to DigbyDalton FYI see followup post at ANI NewsAndEventsGuy ( talk) 15:56, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Contributions/AnddoX&offset=&limit=500&target=AnddoX
Same articles (Ninja Gaiden, Zelda and Metal Gear games), same kind of edits (particularily telling is the replacement of Ayane's infobox image, which was Anndo X obsession), created few weeks after AnddoX was indef banned. -- Niemti ( talk) 16:56, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Also F-Zero, Splinter Cell and Bayonetta games, etc. Absolutely AnddoX. -- Niemti ( talk) 17:05, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Is there a particular reason why you have put that message on my page? I'm aware its a contested area and don't really need reminding. have I transgressed some line? Sayerslle ( talk) 01:00, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Can you please check the users Sock puppet investigation archive please? Sohambanerjee1998 10:13, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind tips. However, please do not remove "controversy" section of this page as it is well documented that MPEG protested the producer of this film. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation.-- Dunforget ( talk) 00:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Cousin Terio is signifigant and the article does not deserve to be deleted. Terio is insanely popular. Do a google search for him and you will see. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathgenious989 ( talk • contribs) 01:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Can you offer your opinion on which photo would be better for the Rebecca Housel Infobox in this discussion? If you are unable to, I understand; you don't have to reply to this message. Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 03:36, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23. CenterforIsraelEducation ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, Mini apolis 21:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bbb, if you should feel like playing sleuth to a complicated piece of original research, I've started the ball rolling at the BLP noticeboard regarding MS Mikhail Lermontov and Richard Prebble. I'm calling it quits for the day, but there's a lot of investigative journalism here, and it's not easy to separate reliable sources from an agenda. Anyway, there's no expectation that you dig into this any time soon, if at all, but you're very good at this sort of thing, and there may be talk page stalkers who take an interest as well. All that said, consider this is an opportunity to say hello, more than an attempt to complicate your life. I hope you're well. Cheers, JNW ( talk) 00:21, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
I wrote the material you removed based on an interview I did with Martha Johnson. Why was it taken down. If you need citation, I can provide it. I am new to this and could use help, not removing my material. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaronbadgley ( talk • contribs) 21:52, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
I, in turn, suggest that you familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policy, because it is quite obviously a violation of any number of content policies to categorize an organization under a category that more-or-less directly states that the organization is guilty of terrorism. There is no "consensus" issue to be raised here. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 03:33, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I think this (following [37] and [38] in the last 24 hours) violates both the spirit and the letter of the Syrian Civil War sanctions. When you get a chance, can you please follow up with the user? I will notify Blade shortly that I posted this here. VQuakr ( talk) 04:47, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi thanks for the heads up VQuakr. I can see why you might think the above but I did a lot of work which you changed en mass here [39] And I thought it was good material, which we had been talking about esp as the new editor Swawa came in with those points of his. This started when you edited out again en masse discussed edits that Swawa bought up and I put in. Here. [40]. I put them back in again and you changed it back again. I did some thinking. I was tempted to just revert, but took a leaf from what you did with your one edit removing mulitple disparate lines. (I can see how you removed all this material is a way to circumvent the one revert rule). I saw you had some points and reworked some of the material back in.
You seem to have issues with Swawa refs. On talk I suggested you take issue with a ref you dont think is reliable on the appropriate forum, rather than delete it without discussion. Please re read Podiaebbas comments in the 'Secret US intel' thread about refs. The two editors here and myself all hold the same view. You dont agree with us and keep changing the edits back. Its frustrating. Blade-of-the-South ( talk) 07:02, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
He's violated 1RR again, [41], [42]. I asked him to self-revert on his talk page and he refused. The second one was a similar revert to several others he has done in the last few days, so in my opinion it violates the spirit of WP:EW as well (admittedly, this time is less severe). As always, if you want me to start taking these to a noticeboard instead, I am happy to oblige. VQuakr ( talk) 04:02, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Bbb23 Please read my talk page where I replied, BTW I did this revert at 00:05, 25 October 2013 and its the only one today, yesterday I did one contiguous edit, thks for the heads up though. BTW I didnt refuse I mentioned it was the next UTC I edited meaning 1 revert per 24 hr period. If he had of mentioned that wasnt the rule, i would have reverted. That is ? was my understanding of how things work. 24 hr UTC time. Others seem to edit the same and if thats not the rule some are transgressing also incl Sayerslle & Rolf h nelson and VQuaker did the same here [43] by editing in a rolling 24 hr period with these reverts.
23:46, 25 September 2013 VQuakr (talk | contribs) . . (195,853 bytes) (-1,275)
19:34, 25 September 2013 VQuakr (talk | contribs) . . (191,057 bytes) (-582) . .
Blade-of-the-South talk 05:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, in the SSCS talk page I am trying to understand why people are picking and chosing some categories to bury in sub cats of subcats but not others. I feel like I am being personally insulted and targeted for comment rather than having the issue addressed. Could you please take a look and see if I'm crazy. I'm not trying to bait or fight, just understand why favorable cats are kept and unfavorable ones are buried in subcats. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sea_Shepherd_Conservation_Society#.22Eco-terrorism.22 I have asked the user a number of times to stop focusing on me but to address the issue of content I am trying to get at. 76.112.8.146 ( talk) 18:35, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Here was the Tally after slightly more discussion:
That was after more discussion just to be sure and should give you a clue as to what is really happened. The only thing that changed in that list from the beginning of the last round of edits was Gaijin who previously may not have made his preference as clear. It's about to be a moot point though because that cat is up for deletion. The conversation will soon shift yet again to the original question. Eco-terrorism on the main page or not. 76.112.8.146 ( talk) 01:11, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
There are multiple discussions. 1. Is Eco-terrorism an appropriate Category? Qwyxian and myself say yes, Aus, Epipe and North say no. 2. Should the category be listed on the main page of the sub cat page? (for which plenty of opinion and no policy has yet been cited other than we all agree that it shouldn't be both) Aus says sub cat page. North chose main page. I agree with main page. Qwyrx comment reflects that either would be appropriate. We should resolve these questions independently to avoid confusion. 76.112.8.146 ( talk) 18:19, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
@ AussieLegend: Could you please make your summary clearer on the article talk page? The phrase "Support removal of cat from article" is ambiguous as to what cat you're referring to. If my understanding above here is correct, then you should be saying that. The article keeps shifting. For example, right now both cats are in the article (the parent and the subcat). You're not going to get any clarity as to the consensus if your summary is not clear. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 18:40, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
How did I miss this? /info/en/?search=File:MV_Brigitte_Bardot_stern_view.jpg You were there and took this picture Aussie? You are a SSCS supporter? You were on their ships? Now when you say that you don't understand how removing a category "hides" it from the article I have a clearer picture why. I think it also gives me a more clear picture why you accuse me of adding a negative POV for quoting the news. If this is a topic that is near and dear to your heart, it might be a touch difficult to take a neutral perspective. Please consider that. I thought you were just an editor who was protecting his own edits. I apologize for that assumption Aussie. I still think you're a great editor don't get me wrong, WAY better than me for sure. But I think perhaps I am more nuetral. My vested interest is that I want an article that accurately reflects expert opinion. No more, no less. 76.112.8.146 ( talk) 01:23, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
I am an inexperienced content provider. May I respectfully ask why the link to Harper's Bazaar was deleted? This was quite a coup for Eve. Any advice you care to share will be appreciated. BTW, is there an easy way to insert my name and the timestamp? Thank you, in advance, for your assistance. User:Greenwayfriend 21:47 19 October 2013 (ET) —Preceding undated comment added 01:49, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
Sentence about transsexual woman that I deleted and you reverted has a link to the Wikipedia page Trans_woman. That page lists many people, but does not list either Amazon Eve or Erika Ervin. There is a footnote to an interview on Access Hollywood without a link. There are several copies of the interview on YouTube. Voice Over: And she's had her fair share of taunts. Often, people accuse her of being a man. Amazon Eve: A lot of women who are this tall get this all the time, “Are you sure you are a woman?” It says that on my birth certificate. Many people (men) have difficulty with her size and strength (she's a personal trainer). The link in the text is not relevant. The interview addresses the issue of taunts. There are interviews in which she gets into the topics of being tall and of finding clothes and shoes. I don't think the sentence meets standards. It is just another taunt. May I remove it?-- 66.108.158.173 ( talk) 22:57, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
[Bbb23, I did not get a response to my posting on my talk.] I see that the correct citation template should have been "news." ( On the next item I made no edits. Since you took it out once, I did not want to show disrespect.) Ms. Roitfeld was appointed the global fashion editor of Harper's Bazaar this year. The referenced article is called an "editorial." The point she is making is that beautiful women and female models are diverse in many ways. I chose Johanssen because she is well known and is a typical beauty. I chose the other two because they are unusual in a way that is relevant to Amazon Eve's unusual characteristic of extreme height. Dell'Orefice is 82 years old and an active model--certainly not what one might expect. Similarly Sidibe is obese, although I thought "large" would be more appropriate. Amazon Eve is unusually tall. The other 21 models demonstrate other areas of diversity, but I thought Dell'Orefice and Sidibe were the best context into which to put Amazon Eve. If we can agree on what Roitfeld had in mind, then I think it is appropriate within the sentence to include, in parentheses, what makes other other two women special. Not everyone will know who they are nor take the time to follow the link. Again, I appreciate your assistance and input. I hope you feel that I am responding appropriately. I know I have a lot to learn. -- Greenwayfriend ( talk) 02:24, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansaldo_STS Please leave the revisions from 10/17/2013 (originally) and again on 10/21/2013. The company reorganized recently. The information is factual and can be verified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.165.27.130 ( talk) 17:59, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Does Anugoonj (festival) look the same as the deleted page Anugoonj to you? Jackmcbarn ( talk) 00:19, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
THANKS for the help !!
for your attention does user talk of two admins, look like same to you !!
ofcourse they are why not they do the same work !!
so page related with same event will be ofcourse similar in many aspects !!
regarding the copyright information event is organised by us so we have the copyright information !!
i have changed pages many times to meet wiki policies but every time they delete it without any proper reason !!
so let me ask why same types of pages still flourishing either delete all or shut down your job !!
no thanks !! my pleasure !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrRAWATJI ( talk • contribs) 11:55, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I've just debunkered (yep that's definitely a mystification of source) arguments against deletion, can you confirm an AfD is needed anyway? Thank you! -- Vituzzu ( talk) 11:32, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Bbb23, I would like to bring to your attention User:Priyadswami. This user is the same user who had been blocked (as User:Duarfimaws, User:Swamifraud and their related sock-puppets). This user's recent edits on Bochasanwasi_Shri_Akshar_Purushottam_Swaminarayan_Sanstha violates WP:BLPCRIME (on Priyadarshan Swami) and the edits need to be removed right away. The sources cited do not establish conviction. The user name also violates WP:REALNAME as it is identifiable to Priyadarshan Swami. I urge you to block this user immediately and protect the page against further disruption. Kapil.xerox ( talk) 13:16, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, it looks like the same individual who has been vandalizing articles related to Swaminarayan and Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha has created yet another sockpuppet named Bluespeakers. This sock along with its predecessors Swamifraud, Duarfimaws, Breadinglover, Sageorsun, Priyadaswami, and the numerous Detroit area/Wayne State University IP addresses continues to advance personal agenda by disregarding Wikipedia policies, violating consensus, and edit warring. Most recently, the user is reaching out to editors who are unfamiliar with the sock banning history to try to gain support. I filed the original (unsuccessful) sock report for Swamifraud several months ago and several other users have filed additional reports with more success. Another user has filed a sock puppet investigation today. Could you please assess? Thanks!
Anastomoses (
talk)
20:48, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Bluespeakers ( talk) 16:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello!
I have made a few attempts to clean up List of new religious movements, which is a list article with a long history of contention, topic bans, puppetry, even at least one major contributor who was de-sysoped. Unfortunately, I haven't been successful in the attempt at cleanup. I'm asking you to take a look at the recent activity on the article and the talk page. Although I have my own thoughts on what some of the issues are, I would rather get yours without my frustration bleeding through too heavily.
I am dropping this note for the most recently active admins I saw, and I am hopeful that those extra eyes will make a difference.
Thanks for considering it, cheers! -- Tgeairn ( talk) 21:58, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
That's closed now. Not sure why the formatting was so off, but it was just going to continue being opposed anyway, a pretty obvious snow/notnow. Wizardman 22:07, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23. Thanks for doing the necessary about Austrian Economics. You've even made the proper entry at WP:GS but in doing so you've taking in a side in the long-running controversy, whether new entries go at the bottom or at the top of the list. I had always assumed the top, and of course I'm right, but notice that the last Arbcom clerk to make an entry also used the top of Arbcom's list. Possibly the page could be enhanced with a written note just above each table to say which way the convention runs. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 02:49, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23 - You were right about the non-deletion of Carrie Keranen. I did some further research and she is more notable than what the page described. You did a good job on cleaning that page up. Take care. Dinkytown talk 17:19, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
I hope you don't feel I stepped on your toes, but I have gone ahead and revoked his talk page. I don't believe Retrolord has a desire to do anything other than play games at this point and engaging with him further is not likely to be productive. Beeblebrox ( talk) 19:02, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'm not sure if you're automatically notified but my reply comment to your /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Talk:Men.27s_rights_movement.2FArticle_probation could you reply either there or on my user page (not sure if I get automatic notification so I will check both) Thanks. Still not sure how you meant your calling username "lovely" but the substantive questions too in my comment, thanks. Maleliberation ( talk) 21:14, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for excellent ruling on Austrian economics. Is there a warning message template including your language - or can you or we make one - to put on relevant pages as necessary and refer people to that as a first step, rather than always referring to the ANI thread, general sanctions listing page for this issue, a noticeboard or you, depending on circumstances? We already need this because, as you can see at the top set of new diffs since shortly after you made your ruling where MilesMoney, a new editor, and a less frequent editor are having an increasingly heated debate with charges of Personal attacks. So need to know best approach. Thanks. Later note: Since I noticed even more of it as I continued, did put in this general note about my question to you. Talk:Ludwig_von_Mises_Institute#General_sanctions_have_been_applied. User:Carolmooredc 21:57, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Aussie is at it again. As soon as the lift came off of Sea Shepherd Conservation Society a 3rd editor (North) made an appropriate edit attempting to find solutions in the middle. Aussie immediately changed it back to exactly what it was before the lock. I brought it back the the other editor's edit (round about, chaning a bit) which Aussie reverted again. (and placed a warning on my talk page like it was my fault). Instead the next time I simply reverted to North's last edit instead of adding anything of my own and placed a warning on his. What is the next step if he wants it his way and no one else can take part in the decisions for that page? 76.112.8.146 ( talk) 17:57, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Just so you know. Obviously, the action I take depends on the user's response. Let me know if you disagree with anything. Best, m.o.p 00:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Good evening, Bbb. Your ANI closure on the LvMI threaad, as I understand, adopted a no-tolerance policy regarding future policy violations (both related to conduct or content) on LvMI pages. Some users seem to be using this precedent as an excuse to ban editors based on alleged past misdeeds. Here, we see a totally off-topic thread seeking to ban User:MilesMoney for a host of edits, often made several months ago, when he was a total noob. I ask you to look into this situation because it seems to run contrary to the spirit of the sanctions, which is to have uninvolved admins (not libertarian users who have had political disputes with Miles) heavily scrutinze not past conduct, but future conduct on LvMI-related pages. Steeletrap ( talk) 04:12, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
sean.hoyland asked for a source in the TALK page and i gave him the source. i have no clue why you deleted my answer.
be careful next time.
-- Dorpwnz ( talk) 07:21, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm petitioning for the restoration of the Voltari page. I understand there where a few issues with the initial page, but these were corrected: 1. "you may not edit on behalf of a company, group, institution, product, or website which relates to the entity in question" The page was significantly updated with a personal account. 2. "it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.linkedin.com/company/voltari" Again, the text was significantly rewritten with the addition of more history and background about the company. 3. A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events): again, the change should address this. If not, please provide an explanation so that I can understand why information and the history of a publicly traded company should not belong in an encyclopedia. If this is the case then similar companies such as Millennial Media and Velti do not belong either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redsighthound ( talk • contribs) 14:14, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Really, you are threatening me for what is a reasonable judgement call about CSD tagging? You are the only user that has ever raised such an issue with regard to pages I have tagged, and I have to say I find your threatening and aggressive attitude in this matter extremely disappointing. Honestly I don't think you deserve to be an admin. -- nonsense ferret 01:12, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello. I created a page for Coatsworth and Sons today, but you deleted it. It definitely exists, feel free to check facebook and like them to download their music so that you will know they are real and do in fact exist. Feel free to contact me directly about this at <censored/>. /info/en/?search=Coatsworth_and_Sons — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.20.23.5 ( talk) 04:23, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Just got an google alert that a page on Wikipedia had been made about our artist collective/studio, but when I followed the link I found it had already been deleted. For what reason? Advertising? We didn't make it. We haven't even been given any time to review the page ourselves. Why would you delete a page on an artist studio without consulting us first? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.47.173.147 ( talk) 02:12, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Although redlinks lack construction, they may designate requests to creations of articles they are applied to (such as to films and television series starring Zac Efron and Daniela Ruah, two articles I have edited for this reason in the first place), thus being OK. As for the disruptive editing, I added those redlinks, and you joined in by deleting them. As this action persisted, you have blocked me for about 1 week, and then I have decided to give up and have this conversation with you once my block had been lifted. Homechallenge55 ( talk) 15:31, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bbb, I'm not up to continuing to oversee this crap, which has consisted of several accounts attempting to inflate a school newspaper censorship news item. I've tried to trim it to its essence several times. Could you have a look, see what if anything requires mention here, and determine if page protection is merited? Now, back to resting. Cheers, JNW ( talk) 19:53, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23. We have added you to the list of clerks and subscribed you to the mailing list (info: WP:AC/C#clerks-l). Welcome, and I look forward to working with you! To adjust your subscription options for the mailing list, see the link at mail:clerks-l. The mailing list works in the usual way, and the address to which new mailing list threads can be sent is clerks-llists.wikimedia.org. Useful reading for new clerks is the procedures page, WP:AC/C/P, and the Committee's procedures page, WP:AC/P, but you will learn all the basic components of clerking on-the-job.
New clerks begin as a trainee, are listed as such at WP:AC/C#Personnel, and will remain so until they have learned all the aspects of the job. When you've finished training, which usually takes a couple of/a few months, then we'll propose to the Committee that you be made a full clerk. As a clerk, you'll need to check your e-mail regularly, as the mailing list is where the clerks co-ordinate (an on-wiki co-ordination page also exists but is not used nearly as much). If you've any questions at any point of your traineeship, simply post to the mailing list.
Lastly, it might be useful if you enter your timezone into WP:AC/C#Personnel (in the same format as the other members have), so that we can estimate when we will have clerks available each day; this is, of course, at your discretion. Again, welcome! Regards, Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 00:18, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm recently working on the Iran-Iraq war article - there is edit warring ongoing in the past day and a half [62]. It seems Coltsfan, one of them, incorrectly issued an administrator noticeboard complaint on vandalism [63], later issuing WP:AN complaint (closed with no action taken) and now an RfC. It is however clear that one user clearly violated 3RR. Can you take a look? GreyShark ( dibra) 16:22, 30 October 2013 (UTC)