![]() | This 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. |
Archive 140 | Archive 141 | Archive 142 | Archive 143 | Archive 144 | Archive 145 | → | Archive 149 |
Sorry Drmies, I had to revert back past your improvements because the edits by User:Mys 721tx introduced several errors. I've followed them across several articles and unfortunately I didn't have a good way to fix those and preserve your changes. I'll try to clean it up a bit but I'm having to do this with several of Mys 721tx's edits across several articles. Mkdw talk 04:25, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Regarding your previous block of 2804:D45:9660:EB00:0:0:0:0/64 ( block range · block log ( global) · WHOIS (partial)) and 187.36.168.0/21 ( block range · block log ( global) · WHOIS (partial)), they are back at 177.69.131.0/24 ( block range · block log ( global) · WHOIS (partial)). wizzito | say hello! 00:00, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Drmies,
I don't mean to request a phishing effort but I just reviewed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maram Susli and it seems to be overflowing with sockpuppets and SPA accounts that have been reawakened to participate and ask for this article on a controversial figure to be deleted. How are these situations typically handled? Thanks for any oversight or advice you can supply. Liz Read! Talk! 04:42, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello and good day! I thought contacting you would make sense since we interacted involving this a bit ago. I've tried to get more involved at the relevant talk page to try and get the maintenance templates addressed for the IP, however it appears multiple different IPs with roughly the same editing pattern (at least in edit summaries) are quite set on removing the maintenance templates. The pattern seems to be that an editor will restore the templates, provide concerns on the talk page, and then the IP editors will address some of the talk page points (typically with content removal), make a couple of other edits, and then make the claim that the maintenance templates no longer apply and remove them despite multiple objections to this on talk. Engagement on the talk page exists but doesn't seem engaging, so to speak.
If you don't mind, could you take a look with your mop hat on and see whether or not semi-protection or some other remedy may apply? If there is something I can do better please advise
. —
Sirdog (
talk)
13:27, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
I had even preemptively added the soundtrack to my watchlist, but I had to run out and pick up veal parm dinners for the wife and me. Thanks for handling that. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 22:45, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
No, I didn't put it in the wrong place. The Irvington request was put there while I was writing it, and, as usual, the warnings from the software recognize a race condition, and make any effort to correct it just worse. Robert McClenon ( talk) 01:02, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions review process. The Proposed Decision phase of the discretionary sanctions review process has now opened. A five-day public review period for the proposed decision, before arbitrators cast votes on the proposed decision, is open through November 18. Any interested editors are invited to comment on the proposed decision talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:56, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I've sort of been following events surrounding Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/El Cubano 153, since this editor has given me a bit of grief as well. You also blocked Cusofre - Android Editor as one of the socks. On the Spanish Wikipedia, that user is blocked as a sock of FanPepeMago, who is registered on this Wiki. Not sure if it's worth bringing to SPI, since it's closed and this account has no edits on EN. Also, not sure if it's worth requesting global locks on these accounts since both cross-wiki abuse and sockpuppetry are involved, and the accounts have been active on the Commons (with several files tagged for deletion). I brought it up at the related ANI discussion. TornadoLGS ( talk) 02:45, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, if you have a moment, I could use some help with a bothersome situation involving another editor who keeps coming back to my user talk after being banned from it.
As you know, per WP:NOBAN, “repeatedly posting on a user's page after being asked not to, without good reason, may be seen as harassment or similar kind of disruptive behavior”.
At 23:30, 17 Jun 2022, User:NewsAndEventsGuy banned me from his user talk. [1]
I reciprocated at 23:34, 17 June 2022 telling that user not to post at my user talk. [2]
At 07:17, 21 July, 2022 he comes back. [3]
At 21:20, 7 Aug 2022 I told him again to “Stop posting at my talk page." [4]
At 21:34 on 15 November 2022 he comes back again. [5]
I would really like to be left alone by this user, especially at my user talk. Can you please help make that happen? Thanks. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 03:39, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Drmies,
Is that Notre-Dame de Sénanque in the page notice? Nice find!
I'd like to request the ability to edit through a VPN, per WP:IPECPROXY. There are some scholarly scholarly resources I can only access through a proxy, which is blocked. And while looking for good sources (mostly newspapers), I've also repeatedly bumped into GDPR-walls that force me to turn on my personal VPN with an American IP, but then I usually need to repeatedly disconnect from the VPN, copy the edits I'm working on, ctrl+R to fully reload, paste the edits (which don't get saved after a hard-reload) into the fresh page, and then submit; then reconnect to the VPN to find more sources, etc. It's a real pain to work around. Thanks. DFlhb ( talk) 08:05, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
I know this LTA's habits somewhat well; all of the IPs they're using are likely proxies; you should hardblock them as such wizzito | say hello! 02:25, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 53, September – October 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:19, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
True to their promise. Could you..? Mutt Lunker ( talk) 09:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
Thought you, Dennis, and/or other ANI 2.0–watchers might appreciate: Wikipedia:Don't edit-war with vandals or sockpuppets. Haven't decided on a shortcut yet. Maybe WP:DONTEDTWARWITHVANDALSORSOCKPUPPETS. Or WP:3RRYESBUTALSONO. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 09:54, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi! I see that you tagged Andrea De Carlo with COI some years ago. I agree that based on the edit history, that was the right call. If the edits you are concerned with are limited to the ones that appear to have been made by the subject of the article, having reviewed them, I propose that the tag is no longer needed, and have started a discussion on the talk page. I'd appreciate your input!
I notice, by the way, that you also amended the lede of the article to correct my overly literal translation of the original article. I appreciate that. I have no conflict of interest, except in so far as I have read and enjoyed a number of the subject's books. -- Shunpiker ( talk) 15:39, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
I wish Wikimedia had shadow banning implemented... Thanks for the catch! Cheers Adakiko ( talk) 02:16, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
I was away for vacation in the U.S., pictured, after we had an Ukrainian choir visiting, my first subject celebrated 60, and we heard Bach's ultimate statement about life and death (3 concerts in 3 days) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 17:04, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
I had just realized "wait, that image section is beyond silly" and headed to remove it before noticing you already did it. Thanks for doing the embarrassing work. LilianaUwU ( talk / contribs) 03:09, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
On 26 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Exchange Hotel, Montgomery, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Exchange Hotel, Montgomery (pictured), where Confederate president Jefferson Davis's inaugural procession started, also hosted Ku Klux Klan leaders, politicians, prostitutes, and two US presidents? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Exchange Hotel, Montgomery. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Exchange Hotel, Montgomery), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile ( talk) 00:02, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Nice one. Don't forget to add entries to List of hotels in the United States..♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Hook update | |
Your hook reached 15,797 views (658.2 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of November 2022 – nice work! |
theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) (she/her) 05:39, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, I have reviewed your nomination and there's a minor issue which needs to be resolved before it can go ahead. Plus, you need to provide a QPQ for this and the good news is that I have 'an extra QPQ' which you can use if you like – I owe you :). -- Mhhossein talk 11:53, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Hook update | |
Your hook reached 15,797 views (658.2 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of November 2022 – nice work! |
theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) (she/her) 04:38, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
It's been a while, but I have done a thing. (Well, "done" is a stretch, but gotten a decent start anyway...) Ladyof Shalott 16:46, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).
/64
to the end of an IP in
Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and
consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.I've brought up Foorgood's conduct on this talkpage in AndyTheGrump's most recent daily appearance at ANI [6]. Acroterion (talk) 02:19, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
about [7] whose every edit has been reverted? Doug Weller talk 09:39, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Back at User:2.99.81.66. (Would like to see how the protestations of good faith sit with this one.) Mutt Lunker ( talk) 10:39, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I can't believe I'm writing this, but your response to the unblock request by Guswen has some confusion. I utterly agree that he's been a waste of time, and the only reason I noticed your reply is because he's one of the irritants I decided to keep track of. His block for socking was only three weeks. I don't know the rationale for the limited block, I thought socking was a death penalty offense, but that's what Dreamy Jazz picked - probably just to get past the deletion review. What Guswen is running into is a range block you installed on 5 January 2022, here, for a long-term abuser. I suspect your targeted LTA is not Guswen, since he was successfully editing after that block had been imposed, which implies his IP address was not in that range back in July. I'd suspect his IP provider has changed, and he got caught in that range block. Regards, Tarl N. ( discuss) 05:33, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
The nominator didn't make any notifications for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black children as alligator bait, so I'm doing the honors; you are one of the major editors of the article. Yngvadottir ( talk) 22:59, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello. Thanks for blocking
Deyodeyabanow, who is a self-confessed sock of Evlekis, but he needs to have his TPA revoked (as can be seen on his talk page), the other three I mentioned on ZZuuzz's talkpage (
see this) are also Evlekis, and need the usual treatment (i.e. indeff plus removed TPA and email).
Have a good day! - Tom
|
Thomas.W
talk
16:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions review process.
The Arbitration Committee has concluded the 2021-22 review of the contentious topics system (formerly known as discretionary sanctions), and its final decision is viewable at the revision process page. As part of the review process, the Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
The above proposals that are supported by an absolute majority of unrecused active arbitrators are hereby enacted. The drafting arbitrators (CaptainEek, L235, and Wugapodes) are directed to take the actions necessary to bring the proposals enacted by this motion into effect, including by amending the procedures at WP:AC/P and WP:AC/DS. The authority granted to the drafting arbitrators by this motion expires one month after enactment.
The Arbitration Committee thanks all those who have participated in the 2021-22 discretionary sanctions review process and all who have helped bring it to a successful conclusion. This motion concludes the 2021-22 discretionary sanctions review process.
This motion initiates a one-month implementation period for the updates to the contentious topics system. The Arbitration Committee will announce when the initial implementation of the Committee's decision has concluded and the amendments made by the drafting arbitrators in accordance with the Committee's decision take effect. Any editors interested in the implementation process are invited to assist at the implementation talk page, and editors interested in updates may subscribe to the update list.
For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
TY for the quick action in helping to protect Gudie Hutchings. — Moops ⋠ T⋡ 01:45, 15 December 2022 (UTC) |
Hi and happy holidays! I just created the biography on Henriette Willemina Crommelin and thought it might interest you. Perhaps you have access to some additional sources? No worries if you're busy with other things. -- Rosiestep ( talk) 14:55, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
I thought the vandalism was over already! Guess not., sadly. Thankfully, it's been suppressed, ECP applied. Sarrail (talk) 22:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
2603:6011:7501:7862:78A5:31BF:9575:397D
I had a reference for my edits Guardians delay Progressive Field renovations until after 2023 | wkyc.com, but I could not get the reference to format correctly. Any help that you could provide in this matter would be greatly appreciated!!!!!!!!!! Saved by God's grace ( talk) 03:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi there. You recently protected the article Deanna Lynn Wulff because of BLP violations by a string of IP editors. BD2412 has now also protected the AfD page because of IP vote-stacking.
Another IP has now left comments on the article talk page (after deleting a comment from a bot about a file deletion). I wasn't sure if talk pages are by default excluded from page protection, but that looks to be the case. I wasn't sure if reverting the comments was the right thing to do, so instead I moved the IP comments after restoring the deleted text from the bot.
Given that all these IPs geolocate to the San Francisco area, I think it's reasonable to assume that they have been WP:CANVASSed to edit this article and the AfD debate. Is there anything else actionable beyond what's already been done? -- Drm310 🍁 ( talk) 03:51, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
What? Drmies not a big fan of the TRUTH!! Meh. Think K-state has a chance against The Crimson Tide in the Sugar Bowl? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 17:31, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello. I was wondering if you could revoke the TPA of the IP in question. Thank you. SunilNevlaFan ✨ 21:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Not sure if you might be able to add to here? Seems like frustrations are boiling over a bit with the current situation. Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
I've been noticing lately that User:JosephWC keeps adding unsourced content to Wikipedia pages such as Johnny Blaze and Killer Croc, and refusing to provide an explanation nor sourcing for any of them. Every time someone undoes their edits for proper reasons, such as their lack of sources, they counter undo as soon as possible with no explanation at all. Plus, I left a message on their talk page asking them to provide context for their edits and their disagreements with me, and they removed it outright and still refused to explain themselves. I could really use some help in resolving this situation before it escalates too far. Blazewing16 ( talk) 23:46, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Of course they're vandalizing on their talk page after you blocked them. Could you remove their TPA, please? LilianaUwU ( talk / contribs) 01:15, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Much respect for you but think you went off half cocked, Mackensen seems to have misled you into thinking that the bibliography was all that was edited. This isn't about adding a bibliography, that would be ridiculous. Horse Eye's Back ( talk) 18:39, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
The article Aaron Santcroos has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
subject fails to meet the relevant notability guideline
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:00, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! |
![]() |
|
Hello, Drmies. I saw that you revoked the talk page access of 69.127.80.35 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS). Was this a mistake? The IP's recent edits were to remove trolling by another IP [ 90.254.33.32 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS), blocked by Ad Orientem] from their talk page. If this were intentional, it's concerning: we've effectively allowed a user's taunts to get another's talk page access removed ... Sdrqaz ( talk) 02:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Whatever you celebrate at this time of year, whether it's Christmas or some other festival, I hope you and those close to you have a happy, restful time! Have fun, Donner60 ( talk) 00:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)}} |
![]() |
Hello Drmies: From high in the Canadian Arctic I hope you enjoy the holiday season, Quviasukvik, the Winter or Summer solstice, Christmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah or even the Saturnalia, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 06:52, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello Drmies: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, RV ( talk) 07:58, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
user Raj172027 is removing and reverting many contents of different articles which has citations to it and have relavent information about article in it. Please take serious actions against the user as i had already tried to solve the matter over user talk but still he removing content from articles using his own free will. Piyush Negi 07:46, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
He is not giving a proper reason for removing contents of the article and doing so just for his personal grudge against me. Piyush Negi 07:49, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
I had joined wikipedia around 4 years ago and i loved to edit articles here and never violates any terms and policies of wikipedia, but since user Raj172027 joined wikipedia 2 months ago he tried to remove my edits without a citation and a valid reason. Piyush Negi 08:05, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy Holidays | |
Hello, I wish you the very best during the holidays. And I hope you have a very happy 2023! Bruxton ( talk) 18:57, 25 December 2022 (UTC) |
Hello, Drmies! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU
(T)
23:03, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:03, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
On 10 December 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lynching of Orion Anderson, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Orion Anderson, who was murdered by a lynch mob in Virginia in 1889, was recently found to have been only 14 years old at the time of his death? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lynching of Orion Anderson. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Lynching of Orion Anderson), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:03, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() | |
happy new year |
---|
Thank you for that. Thank you also for the swiftest DYK review in a decade. The slowest is Talia Or, and where I reached the end of my expression in English is Concentricities, - perhaps you could cast an eye on that one? Let's try my English here: when a subject is John Miller, we need something to be added to make it unusual, but when the subject is already unusual, isn't that enough to qualify for the new rule that replaced "interesting to a broad audience"? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:40, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
User:Cielquiparle, I am not happy with that new hook, and I was completely unaware of it--pinging me would have been the decent thing to do. It really took the sting out of the horrible event. Please do not do that to me again. Drmies ( talk) 17:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The Purple Barnstar | |
I never saw such commitment to Wikipedia despite the constant harrassment from vandals. Keep it up. LilianaUwU ( talk / contribs) 06:05, 28 December 2022 (UTC) |
Back in May 2021 you removed talk page access, rightly in my opinion, from a blocked editor called Tympanus. I had myself previously declined an unblock request from the editor. They have now posted an unblock request at UTRS. I am not totally impressed by the request, but it does not repeat the kinds of problematic things which led to your removal of talk page access, and while I am not about to accept the current request, I am inclined to restore talk page access, and give them a chance to post an unblock request there. Any thoughts? JBW ( talk) 22:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
This is UTRS appeal #67374
What say ye? -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 22:50, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Best wishes for the holidays | |
Wishing you and yours the best over the holiday season, and here's hoping 2023 won't bring as much global trauma as 2020, the worse 2021 [9] & fecking 2022! Ceoil ( talk) 16:06, 30 December 2022 (UTC) |
Drmies,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—
Moops ⋠
T⋡
22:58, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠ T⋡ 22:58, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Drmies,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (
talk)
03:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Abishe ( talk) 03:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy New Year! | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy New Year, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free and may Janus light your way. Ealdgyth ( talk) 13:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC) |
Hey Drmies, season's greetings! When you have a moment, could you let us have your thoughts at Talk:Cyber Anakin#Cyber Anakin's involvement in identifying the man harassing female chess players? Hope all is well with you and yours! (And a certain disgraced dragon sends you good wishes.) Best, Andreas JN 466 21:10, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Apologies, I had erred on the side of caution that the address might have changed hands since the last block. :)
Either way, am reminded to stop by to say Happy New Year and all the best to you for 2023. -- Euryalus ( talk) 22:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Drmies,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. See
this for background context.
Mhhossein
talk
07:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Mhhossein talk 07:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
On 4 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fuccboi (novel), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Fuccbois' crew won awards, while Fuccboi's prose received both praise and criticism? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fuccbois. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Fuccboi (novel)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
BorgQueen ( talk) 00:03, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mikemikev Doug Weller talk 10:15, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, I just wanted to apologize if my reverts at Historical negationism recently were unhelpful. I was patrolling recent changes for possible vandalism and sometimes I move a little too quickly while reverting, without taking the edit into context. I'm trying to do better in the future. Thank you for your hard work on Wikipedia and happy New Year. Herbfur (Eric, He/Him) ( talk) 03:44, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi, would you mind beefing up the rangeblock referenced here [10]. They are now extending their vandalism to other pages outside the ones listed in their block. - Who is John Galt? ✉ 15:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
On 4 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fuccbois, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Fuccbois' crew won awards, while Fuccboi's prose received both praise and criticism? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fuccbois. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Fuccbois), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
BorgQueen ( talk) 00:02, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Hook update | |
Your hook reached 17,154 views (714.7 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of January 2023 – nice work! |
GalliumBot ( talk • contribs) (he/ it) 03:27, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).
I'm sorry. I missed this at first. I apologize if I troubled you.
You don't think that putting a date label helps with understanding what's in Talk? I did it to help understand how recent those posts were. The content is still clear. Too bad there isn't an automatic date function along with the title.
I'm sure you also noticed I grouped the 3 Vertabedian sections together.
I've a strong interest in organizing info, hence the To-Dos. I think discussing organization and article needs is a very good idea. The article has come a long way in the last few months, and I think it's looking pretty good (but there always seem to be more needs!).
I'm not trying to steamroll anybody; I just want to make things better. Robert92107 ( talk) 05:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
No insult intended, and none taken. (right?) Nice to meet you.
Your edit comment there says -- (in part) -- "Rv commentary". I did not think that anyone would consider explaining the meaning of a phrase to be an instance of op-ed. (Did you read my edit comment?) By the way, that phrase seems to have a different meaning in the US Congress ["House of Representatives"] than ... the meaning at ... item number "[4]" under Agenda (meeting)#Standard Order of Business.
Your edit comment there says -- (in part) -- "this is unnecessary".
I did not insist that it was necessary ... at least, not in the sense that, if something had remained ambiguous, and if it were therefore (even 'slightly') possible for someone to misunderstand it, that the world the wiki would explode. I just thought that, it would be better, if a small change were added, to remove the ambiguity.
Thanks for listening (reading this). Mike Schwartz ( talk) 16:05, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
Please sir believe that🙏🙏 Khelna Bari page not only me but many other editors have improved the page. Many think that I am a member of Zee Bangla. But that is not the case sir, I have edited many pages apart from Zee Bangla. I create pages for series that I know well about. But believe me sir I have never added wrong information to any page and never let anyone do it. No one can accept that I have moved to the main page by improving the continuous underdeveloped pages of many editors. So sir, one request to you🙏🙏 is to protect the Khelna Bari page. Because I am saying with revise that the reliable source that is added to this page has the depth of the source clearly passes WP:NTV with sufficient WP:GNG. Nilpriyo ( talk) 1:46, 7 January 2023.
I ask your advice about editor Nilpriyo. Nilpriyo has a remarkable interest in Zee Bangla and their programs. To such an extend that it makes my uneasy. Off course, it is possible that Nilpriyo is just a superfan but other options are also possible. Especially this edit shows off red flags and set my alarm bells off. And this edit is not helping either as removed the prod from several of its own articles. Is it a good idea to go to the COI-notice board, based on his edit history? The Banner talk 17:14, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, thank you for the advice here. I share The Banner's concern about this editor.
To show that they are an SPA account for Zee Bangla, the last 10 articles that they have edited are all Zee Bangla shows: Ei Poth Jodi Na Sesh Hoy, Gouri Elo, Tomar Khola Hawa, Ranga Bou, Bodhisattwor Bodhbuddhi, Khelna Bari, Tomar Khola Hawa, List of programmes broadcast by Zee Bangla, Mon Dite Chai and Tara (TV series). The first five articles they edited (when the account was created in November 2020) are: Zee Bangla, Agnipariksha (2009 TV series), , Karunamoyee Rani Rashmoni, Krishnakoli, Bagh Bondi Khela (TV series).
My concern is that their behaviour seems quite disruptive:
Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 23:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | |
happy new year |
---|
just my mother's birthday - she introduced me to music -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:34, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm on vacation, - click on songs! I tell my own stories now, instead of relying on DYK. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Trust the next lot of the same number are as much fun JarrahTree 13:23, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
[14] I could be very wrong, but I see some element of WP:OWN and a few other possession of the truth issues, nothing but the facts ma'am, it's probably not worth immediate action, but a FYI is tendered here. JarrahTree 12:28, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
RE: [15]. Rather than just reverting, I figured better to discuss directly. Is the phrase "served as" a euphemism? Blindly estimating, but at least 95% of our articles on politicians use this term, so I think the consensus-in-practice is in favor of it. Curbon7 ( talk) 14:06, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's contentious topics procedure revision process.
In December, the Arbitration Committee adopted the contentious topics procedure, which replaces the former discretionary sanctions system. The contentious topics procedure is now in effect following an initial implementation period.
The drafting arbitrators warmly thank all those who have worked to implement the new procedure during this implementation period and beyond. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 19:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
On 18 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bulkboek, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Bulkboeken ('bulk books') were cheap reprints of Dutch literary classics, published from 1971 to the late 1990s, and again from 2007? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bulkboek. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Bulkboek), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
BorgQueen ( talk) 12:02, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Check out the geolocation of the IP in the CU log for Tailsultimatefan3891, along with their contribution history. Or the overlap at Requests for decrease in protection here. The more I dig, the duckier it gets.-- Ponyo bons mots 23:23, 19 January 2023 (UTC) ...and they all edit Wikivoyage. Who the hell edits Wikivoyage?-- Ponyo bons mots 23:31, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Ugh.
Liliana
UwU (
)
10:58, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi there, I wanted to ask you to take a look at the recent history of Isaac Asante and Muhamed Tijani. I am having an issue with an editor called Soares1967 who has continually reverted my edits of their very poorly written (often grammatically incorrect at very basic levels—improper spacing, sentence fragments, etc.) edits. I have repeatedly left edit summaries explaining my edits, and I have also left two comments on their Talk page, along with two other editors saying similar things. The user has never responded to any of the comments, and they continue to make the same incorrect edits mentioned in the Talk page comments and revert corrections thereto. I don't want to get into an edit war with this user, but they never leave edit summaries and more often than not leave articles much worse than how they found them, occasionally making them outright senseless in their wake. I feel like I have run out of options beyond seeking the advice of an admin. I appreciate any help you can give me. Anwegmann ( talk) 00:13, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
You might be interested in Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Prohibition on the locking of user talk pages. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 19:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 54, November – December 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 14:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
I am going to revert your recent edit on this article, mainly because the redirect is not accurate and 28 years out of date but I feel the redirecting to Ferrari 488 would still not be a useful redirect either. I will not edit war if you feel the need to. -- Falcadore ( talk) 02:15, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Drmies,
I saw that you once deleted this draft article as the creation of a sockpuppet so I'm hoping you can check this latest version to see if it is also the product of a block-evading editor. I see I once gave it protection but the page lost it when it was created and deleted subsequent to the protection being imposed. Thanks, in advance, for your help. Liz Read! Talk! 16:57, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
You might want to take a look at what's unfolding there... seems like folks aren't seeing what you're seeing, and we may end up with a situation where the correct policy-based option is the exact opposite of the physical "consensus". I have no idea what we're supposed to do in such an instance. Taking Out The Trash ( talk) 15:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi there. Hope the new year has been treating you well. Not sure if you recall much about this user's block log. They started this recent thread Talk:2023_Half_Moon_Bay_shootings#Trying_to_hide_the_simple_truth_that_the_killer's_connection_with_China_is_a_dishonest_joke. Is this POV pushing worthy of an on the spot indef, given their history, or just let it play out? I've got no prior history with them. — Bagumba ( talk) 14:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
On 27 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tarn Wadling, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the now-drained lake Tarn Wadling was famous as a liminal place where the spectre of Guinevere's dead mother appeared to her and Gawain in The Awntyrs off Arthure? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tarn Wadling. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Tarn Wadling), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
-- RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Please round the coordinates obtained from Google, as I have done for the Tarn Wadling article. Google has taken to providing 16 digit coordinates in what is believed to be a copyright trap scheme. That level of precision is in the 1/100th of a micrometre range. Abductive ( reasoning) 01:05, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello Drmies. Just wanted to ask a general question as you are an admin and may be able to answer. If I were to falsely claim that I was previously an administrator and mediator on Wikipedia, am I liable to face any penalties? What can be done about this situation? starship .paint ( exalt) 16:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, I wanted to ask for clarification on the page Addiction Rare in Patients Treated with Narcotics, which I created years ago and which you just semi-protected due to persistent sockpuppetry. I just got a message on my talk page from someone, presumably the sockpuppeteer in question, complaining about how constructive edits to the page were being wrongly reverted. I wanted to get some idea of what kind of disruptive/unhelpful edits the sockpuppets have been engaging in on the article. IntoThinAir ( talk) 01:05, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 23:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I'm following up on an ANI post of mine from October in which you blocked an IP user that is making false death claims. They seem to be active after the block on 2804:D45:9600:0:0:0:0:0/40 ( block range · block log ( global) · WHOIS (partial)) and last edited 2 days ago. Would appreciate another block. wizzito | say hello! 23:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
. . . is undoubtedly correct based on the present article, but I have removed it and notified two projects to see if they can access a couple of sources which exceed my skills. [19] If no one comes forward in a reasonable time (one month?) I will have no objection to its deletion. Best wishes, Kablammo ( talk) 17:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).
What has woollen socks and lawn tennis to do with reverting the article on pine phone? BP OMowe ( talk) 17:54, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi there, User:92.14.216.40/ User:88.110.119.210 has largely been restricting themself to the belligerent haunting of the Talk:2023 page, now as User:88.110.119.72, an IP blocked for similar disruptive engagement there a couple of weeks back. (They have form on current-year articles, e.g. [20], [21].) Ludicrously, they claim never to have been blocked then, presumbaly realising they forgot to hop to a new IP, that the previous blockee was not them, despite making identical points. Mutt Lunker ( talk) 00:51, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, could you please delete this while you're at it? Thanks. Silikonz 💬 20:01, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Based on the information in UTRS appeal #69221 and after investigating with my checkuser glasses, I'd like to soften the block on the IP address involved, such that it is anon-only. Happy to provide more information if you wish. My opinion takes into account the specific nature of the IP address involved. -- Yamla ( talk) 14:24, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
I didn't know you were a new editor. Certainly explains a lot.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 01:36, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, I wanted to follow-up on a block you made on a user for POV editing. They seem to be continuing this behavior [22], [23] at Talk:2023 China balloon incident, citing/hinting at conspiracy theories relating to the COVID-19 pandemic, per Talk:COVID-19 pandemic#Current consensus, item [14]. Would appreciate if you could take a look. Carter00000 ( talk) 17:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Im not sure if Im supposed to leave a notice or not but to be safe, I mentioned you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Softlemonades in a discussion about me and Cambial Yellowing Softlemonades ( talk) 14:10, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Ha!-- Bbb23 ( talk) 21:05, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
I see you just about everywhere - fighting vandals, making the tough calls on blocking, and thoroughly attempting to help by investigating and going the extra mile on some cases. I think you truly are a tireless contributor, and you fully deserve this beautiful rotating star. Bar Harel ( talk) 04:52, 9 February 2023 (UTC) |
See this. If for some reason I'm incorrect or wrong, please accept my sincere apologies in advance and please revert. :-) ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 05:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Hey, any chance you could revdel this edit? It's got my real name in it, and while I'm not super secretive (and isn't an entire surprise considering my username), it's still not cool per WP:OUTING. The fact that it was part of a rant about me reverting an edit sourced to a Fandom wiki doesn't make me like it any better. oknazevad ( talk) 23:30, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
<Previous discussion blanked and will be revdel'd> Thanks to everybody who were in other time zones or up later, who helped out. The important thing is to contact the emergency staff at the WMF, since they can start the real-world processes according to protocols that can address the real-world problem. Everything we do on-wiki is just clean-up, and we must be mindful of privacy for minors, whether they're abusing the project for horrible jokes, or are in genuine crisis. Having a fair amount of experience with this sort of thing, including back in the do-it-yourself days, I have an essay in mind that might clarify the issues involved. Acroterion (talk) 13:24, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Linking that, or continuing with the eternal looping back to the Arb case from 2009, I consider that to be a form of harassment when it happens on-wiki, and as you know I have acted against it on a number of occasions.
[24]
You mean like this? And this? And of course he did immediately after I asked him not to do exactly THAT [25] Volunteer Marek 18:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, mind protecting this article? I put a request at RFPP but its becoming a bit of a battle. IPs (and one registered account) are stating he is dead but I found nothing about it via a Google search. S0091 ( talk) 22:03, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Drmies, Regarding wiki article "2022 Nord Stream pipeline sabotage" [26]; Seymour Hersh posted a subject matter, that includes unsubstantiated allegations against a living person, in a blog post on the social media blog Substack [27]. RS report that Hersh's subject matter about the living person and others include details that media outlets have not verified and have not corroborated [28] [29].
Wiki editors used those RS (that I cited above) and then posted very indepth paragraph of Hersh's unsubstantiated allegations against the living person and others. I'm emphasizing subject matter because it seems to me that his subject matter in his blog is
WP:UNDUE & may be even
WP:LIVING. Since Hersh didn't publish his piece in a news blog (which sometimes may be an RS), but rather he put a social media blog post it may be
WP:NOTRS and
WP:QS. I feel his social media blog post is not an acceptable source under
WP:SPS "social media postings are largely not acceptable as sources"
Now here's where my confusion lies and where I hope you can educate me. On the talk page, some have said that since RS have reported on Hersh writing a blog post (not verifying the subject matter), that "we can and should certainly report on this important voice (since it's been reported in secondary sources) while avoiding a judgement whether it's correct or not."
[30].
In this case if feel "it's" means the blog post, not the subject matter. I guess what I'm asking is, 1) Do we write an entire paragraph outlining, in detail, unsubstantiated allegations against a living person and others that are posted on a social media blog, or 2) Do we only include such social media blog posts when RS report on the actual subject matter that stemmed from the blog post? I know this is confusing so I thank you in advance for any time you spend on this. Best regards~ BetsyRMadison ( talk) 19:31, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
...have you been upsetting? - See Mitchell Haynes gave Drmeis Cannabis ( talk · contribs) :D 10mmsocket ( talk) 17:13, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
I know you are a reasonable and respected editor. Would you have a moment to look at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#RFC on Minneapolis cuisine image. I'm not sure this person knows what they are doing, and I'm wondering if it should be procedurally closed. I was threatened with a block if I didn't remove a photo, and then the very photo she threatened me over is included in the RFC. And most of the RFC was already decided in an RFC two months ago, but the photo she wanted was decided against, so she included it in this new RFC. I'm not sure if this is forum shopping. I understand if you don't want to get involved. Thanks. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:44, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Magnolia, certainly your first sentence is very true and greatly appreciated. Sandy, you have to admit--that's a good move. But Magnolia, what you pointed out as a threat, well that's not really a threat--Sandy is not an administrator (right?) and if she were she wouldn't be able to do anything pertaining to you given the mutual involvement. So, rather than a threat, it's a possible course of action. I cannot gauge to which extent such an effort might be successful. You know I appreciate your work here, and I hope we'll do more of it.
I looked at the RfC. I also think it's a bit complicated but they're always complicated, if it's not a simple yes or no to one question. Still, if I had to close it, I think I could figure it out. What I would leave out is the stuff about the other articles--I think you were pointing at another place, with a picture, etc., and I don't know what to do with that. What I'm really hoping for is that you (both of you, I guess) see the best in each other's edits, but that's kind of saccharine of me, knowing and appreciating both of you, and thus already being somewhat involved but torn. Still, a different RfC on a similar but sufficiently different topic, even if it was only a few months ago, I wouldn't have a problem with that. I try to think of RfCs not as things one wins or loses, but as processes that hopefully lead to article improvement, and so I do think you probably need to pull back a bit. Magnolia--I really do appreciate you as an editor. Drmies ( talk) 17:40, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Drmies. I just read your reply regarding No-kill shelter and I am sorry for the oversight. I had noticed a very large edit from an IP user that was unsourced and with what appeared as a non-NPOV edit summary. My intention was to quickly remedy the situation and it is clear I acted too fast, despite my best intentions. Thanks for pointing it out and please know it's noted. Ppt91 ( talk) 03:18, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
You know [33]] see my talk page and Gamaliels. Doug Weller talk 16:28, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, I've removed the " Bejrisch case request", as it was declined by a majority of the committee as premature. Let me know if you have any questions. Moneytrees🏝️ (Talk) 21:20, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Holocaust in Poland and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, GeneralNotability ( talk) 20:11, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi drmies,
I reckon this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Rational_Software_Architect&oldid=1099667592 was over-zealous.
I agree the article was pretty much an ad for an old product. But that product is not UML, it's a tool that people might use or might have used to create UML models. I suggest a one sentence or one paragraph description of the product on Rational Software, and Rational Software Architect should redirect there.
What do you think? Paul Foxworthy ( talk) 01:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Did you mean to create this page in the User: namespace? I don't think I've ever seen that template used in the main space. — Mainframe98 talk 18:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
I don't know the "code," but what's the frequency, Kevin. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 20:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Drmies,
You deleted Big Kidd as being the work of a block-evading editor and now a new editor has created Talk:Big Kidd objecting to the deletion. Can you use your CU goggles to see if this is a new incarnation of the previous editor? Many thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 02:41, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, Juanochoa1234567$ ( talk · contribs) who you partially blocked from List of Asian countries by population is just making the same edit in multiple other articles, and repeatedly pushing Russian nationalist talking points on the talk pages. I don't think the partial block is going to cover it. See here and here for the latest. 25stargeneral ( talk) 02:26, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Further to comments at user talk:Nilpriyo, unfortunately I haven't kept a list of all the apparently related accounts that I have seen, but a very quick check of editing history produced the following small selection: Its.com85, Itsrik7, Siddhartha sengupta2001, & Nilpriyo. The promotional nature of the editing looks like COI/UPE, but if so it's very incompetently done. It may be a group of fans. I really don't know. Whatever the situation there is enough promotional editing, incompetence, lack of cooperation etc, that probably blocking all the accounts is the best option in the long run. JBW ( talk) 09:44, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
An Anon editor suddenly popped into the talk page at 2022 Nords Stream [34] to target me & only me to personally attack by using insults, name calling, & very disparaging comments about me. [35] [36] I have a feeling that the anon editor may be a sockpuppet (and possibly a sock of an editor on that page). Anyway, Can you tell me how I can find out if they're a sockpuppet or troll so I can get them banned from that page due to their disruptive & disparaging comments about me? I thank you in advance for any help you can give me, and best regards~ BetsyRMadison ( talk) 16:30, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Vast history of disruptive edit warring and personal attacks from a user at 42.190.128.0/18 (+ more IP ranges). Thank you.
For your specific case, refer to User talk:Drmies/Archive 142#Belligerent/edit warring IP
AP 499D25 ( talk) 23:57, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Vast history of disruptive edit warring and personal attacks from a user at 42.190.128.0/18 (+ more IP ranges). Thank you.
—DIYeditor (
talk)
00:04, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, I see that on 31 Jan you blocked User:Serratra as a sock of User:Jettew10222. I am seeing some behavioral evidence that active user User:Dinglepincter is the same user. For example, compare Serratra's nonsensical Computing Reference Desk answer here to Dinglepincter's latest one here. Also both users tend to post erroneous/misleading answers at the Teahouse, such as Serratra's here and Dinglepincter's here. Dinglepincter has been warned about this by User:Cullen328 here and User:David notMD here.
Apologies if this should have been posted at SPI; I'm not very familiar with that process, and could not see how to add a new suspected sock to an existing investigation. CodeTalker ( talk) 00:34, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, Good day. I come here to seek advice on editor who is a journalist that uses their company as the source (independent, reliable source (IRS) where by the article is written by their collogue) to support the content added. (note: other journalist in their company wrote the article and they claim they do not have any association with the subject of the article). In short editor/journalist using their company as source to add in the article which info is the same as other IRS indicated as well Would this kind of edit is considered association promotion/advertising their company indirectly and/or any other violation of any type in such edit? Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi I reworded my comment on the arbcom case. Once I saw your ping even before I read it I realised I made a mistake while trying to be too succinct. Sorry for the confusion, my question was directed at arbcom not you, I only brought you up as an example since you mentioned you were a sitting arbitrator but listed as a party. I didn't look at the details as I'm not likely to look at the paper itself.
But since you mentioned you were a sitting arbitrator I wonder if the apparent incongruity between you being a party and the list excluding current and former sitting arbitrators was that anyone who was an arbitrator at the time of any conduct mentioned in the paper was excluded. This would also explain the word choice "who are or were sitting Arbs" rather than "who are or were Arbs".
Or as I've now considered, and especially if you were sitting at the time of the conduct discussed, perhaps any conduct from someone acting as an arbitrator i.e. e.g. an arbcom case or whatever was excluded. But conduct by someone acting as an administrator or even as an individual editor was included even if they were an arbitrator at the time.
(As unfair as this may seem I can see the logic in this. We may re-asses the details of a case but we're very reluctant to assess the behaviour of people acting as arbitrators except in exceptional circumstances. Given the risk it seems like a new committee punishing former arbitrators for stuff we don't link. And that they're given a specific time limited role by the community.)
I struck out my earlier comment figuring it was the easiest way to reduce confusion given the short time it had been there. And as said in my edit summary feel free to strike or remove your comment if you feel it best.
Nil Einne ( talk) 01:55, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, I've been keeping an eye on the list above. Last night, user Ahmetger again tried to vandalise the page by reinstating his last version by leaving a meaningless edit summary Another block wouldn't be exaggerated as he has repeated his old habits, even after a block. Eem dik doun in toene ( talk) 07:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Drmies,
I guess because you are the nominator here, that would make you an involved editor. But maybe one of your fellow CUers watches this talk page and could check out two of the contributors to this AFD who had never edited Wikipedia before but want this article to be Kept. Tres suspicious. Liz Read! Talk! 03:14, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Back in 2017, you participated in a discussion about which projects to mention in Jonathan Karp's biography. I've submitted an edit request to include mention of some the books for which he was the principal acquirer and publisher, as verified in secondary coverage summarizing his career. I'm hoping you might be willing to contribute to the ongoing discussion, or review any of the other edit requests I've submitted at Talk:Jonathan Karp. Thanks in advance for any assistance! Inkian Jason ( talk) 19:24, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 140 | Archive 141 | Archive 142 | Archive 143 | Archive 144 | Archive 145 | → | Archive 149 |
Sorry Drmies, I had to revert back past your improvements because the edits by User:Mys 721tx introduced several errors. I've followed them across several articles and unfortunately I didn't have a good way to fix those and preserve your changes. I'll try to clean it up a bit but I'm having to do this with several of Mys 721tx's edits across several articles. Mkdw talk 04:25, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Regarding your previous block of 2804:D45:9660:EB00:0:0:0:0/64 ( block range · block log ( global) · WHOIS (partial)) and 187.36.168.0/21 ( block range · block log ( global) · WHOIS (partial)), they are back at 177.69.131.0/24 ( block range · block log ( global) · WHOIS (partial)). wizzito | say hello! 00:00, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Drmies,
I don't mean to request a phishing effort but I just reviewed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maram Susli and it seems to be overflowing with sockpuppets and SPA accounts that have been reawakened to participate and ask for this article on a controversial figure to be deleted. How are these situations typically handled? Thanks for any oversight or advice you can supply. Liz Read! Talk! 04:42, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello and good day! I thought contacting you would make sense since we interacted involving this a bit ago. I've tried to get more involved at the relevant talk page to try and get the maintenance templates addressed for the IP, however it appears multiple different IPs with roughly the same editing pattern (at least in edit summaries) are quite set on removing the maintenance templates. The pattern seems to be that an editor will restore the templates, provide concerns on the talk page, and then the IP editors will address some of the talk page points (typically with content removal), make a couple of other edits, and then make the claim that the maintenance templates no longer apply and remove them despite multiple objections to this on talk. Engagement on the talk page exists but doesn't seem engaging, so to speak.
If you don't mind, could you take a look with your mop hat on and see whether or not semi-protection or some other remedy may apply? If there is something I can do better please advise
. —
Sirdog (
talk)
13:27, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
I had even preemptively added the soundtrack to my watchlist, but I had to run out and pick up veal parm dinners for the wife and me. Thanks for handling that. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 22:45, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
No, I didn't put it in the wrong place. The Irvington request was put there while I was writing it, and, as usual, the warnings from the software recognize a race condition, and make any effort to correct it just worse. Robert McClenon ( talk) 01:02, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions review process. The Proposed Decision phase of the discretionary sanctions review process has now opened. A five-day public review period for the proposed decision, before arbitrators cast votes on the proposed decision, is open through November 18. Any interested editors are invited to comment on the proposed decision talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:56, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I've sort of been following events surrounding Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/El Cubano 153, since this editor has given me a bit of grief as well. You also blocked Cusofre - Android Editor as one of the socks. On the Spanish Wikipedia, that user is blocked as a sock of FanPepeMago, who is registered on this Wiki. Not sure if it's worth bringing to SPI, since it's closed and this account has no edits on EN. Also, not sure if it's worth requesting global locks on these accounts since both cross-wiki abuse and sockpuppetry are involved, and the accounts have been active on the Commons (with several files tagged for deletion). I brought it up at the related ANI discussion. TornadoLGS ( talk) 02:45, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, if you have a moment, I could use some help with a bothersome situation involving another editor who keeps coming back to my user talk after being banned from it.
As you know, per WP:NOBAN, “repeatedly posting on a user's page after being asked not to, without good reason, may be seen as harassment or similar kind of disruptive behavior”.
At 23:30, 17 Jun 2022, User:NewsAndEventsGuy banned me from his user talk. [1]
I reciprocated at 23:34, 17 June 2022 telling that user not to post at my user talk. [2]
At 07:17, 21 July, 2022 he comes back. [3]
At 21:20, 7 Aug 2022 I told him again to “Stop posting at my talk page." [4]
At 21:34 on 15 November 2022 he comes back again. [5]
I would really like to be left alone by this user, especially at my user talk. Can you please help make that happen? Thanks. Anythingyouwant ( talk) 03:39, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Drmies,
Is that Notre-Dame de Sénanque in the page notice? Nice find!
I'd like to request the ability to edit through a VPN, per WP:IPECPROXY. There are some scholarly scholarly resources I can only access through a proxy, which is blocked. And while looking for good sources (mostly newspapers), I've also repeatedly bumped into GDPR-walls that force me to turn on my personal VPN with an American IP, but then I usually need to repeatedly disconnect from the VPN, copy the edits I'm working on, ctrl+R to fully reload, paste the edits (which don't get saved after a hard-reload) into the fresh page, and then submit; then reconnect to the VPN to find more sources, etc. It's a real pain to work around. Thanks. DFlhb ( talk) 08:05, 16 November 2022 (UTC)
I know this LTA's habits somewhat well; all of the IPs they're using are likely proxies; you should hardblock them as such wizzito | say hello! 02:25, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 53, September – October 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:19, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
True to their promise. Could you..? Mutt Lunker ( talk) 09:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
Thought you, Dennis, and/or other ANI 2.0–watchers might appreciate: Wikipedia:Don't edit-war with vandals or sockpuppets. Haven't decided on a shortcut yet. Maybe WP:DONTEDTWARWITHVANDALSORSOCKPUPPETS. Or WP:3RRYESBUTALSONO. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 09:54, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi! I see that you tagged Andrea De Carlo with COI some years ago. I agree that based on the edit history, that was the right call. If the edits you are concerned with are limited to the ones that appear to have been made by the subject of the article, having reviewed them, I propose that the tag is no longer needed, and have started a discussion on the talk page. I'd appreciate your input!
I notice, by the way, that you also amended the lede of the article to correct my overly literal translation of the original article. I appreciate that. I have no conflict of interest, except in so far as I have read and enjoyed a number of the subject's books. -- Shunpiker ( talk) 15:39, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
I wish Wikimedia had shadow banning implemented... Thanks for the catch! Cheers Adakiko ( talk) 02:16, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
I was away for vacation in the U.S., pictured, after we had an Ukrainian choir visiting, my first subject celebrated 60, and we heard Bach's ultimate statement about life and death (3 concerts in 3 days) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 17:04, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
I had just realized "wait, that image section is beyond silly" and headed to remove it before noticing you already did it. Thanks for doing the embarrassing work. LilianaUwU ( talk / contribs) 03:09, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
On 26 November 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Exchange Hotel, Montgomery, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Exchange Hotel, Montgomery (pictured), where Confederate president Jefferson Davis's inaugural procession started, also hosted Ku Klux Klan leaders, politicians, prostitutes, and two US presidents? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Exchange Hotel, Montgomery. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Exchange Hotel, Montgomery), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile ( talk) 00:02, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Nice one. Don't forget to add entries to List of hotels in the United States..♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Hook update | |
Your hook reached 15,797 views (658.2 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of November 2022 – nice work! |
theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) (she/her) 05:39, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, I have reviewed your nomination and there's a minor issue which needs to be resolved before it can go ahead. Plus, you need to provide a QPQ for this and the good news is that I have 'an extra QPQ' which you can use if you like – I owe you :). -- Mhhossein talk 11:53, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Hook update | |
Your hook reached 15,797 views (658.2 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of November 2022 – nice work! |
theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) (she/her) 04:38, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
It's been a while, but I have done a thing. (Well, "done" is a stretch, but gotten a decent start anyway...) Ladyof Shalott 16:46, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2022).
/64
to the end of an IP in
Special:Contributions to see all of a subnet's edits, and
consider blocking the whole subnet rather than an IP that may change within a minute.I've brought up Foorgood's conduct on this talkpage in AndyTheGrump's most recent daily appearance at ANI [6]. Acroterion (talk) 02:19, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
about [7] whose every edit has been reverted? Doug Weller talk 09:39, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Back at User:2.99.81.66. (Would like to see how the protestations of good faith sit with this one.) Mutt Lunker ( talk) 10:39, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I can't believe I'm writing this, but your response to the unblock request by Guswen has some confusion. I utterly agree that he's been a waste of time, and the only reason I noticed your reply is because he's one of the irritants I decided to keep track of. His block for socking was only three weeks. I don't know the rationale for the limited block, I thought socking was a death penalty offense, but that's what Dreamy Jazz picked - probably just to get past the deletion review. What Guswen is running into is a range block you installed on 5 January 2022, here, for a long-term abuser. I suspect your targeted LTA is not Guswen, since he was successfully editing after that block had been imposed, which implies his IP address was not in that range back in July. I'd suspect his IP provider has changed, and he got caught in that range block. Regards, Tarl N. ( discuss) 05:33, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
The nominator didn't make any notifications for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black children as alligator bait, so I'm doing the honors; you are one of the major editors of the article. Yngvadottir ( talk) 22:59, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello. Thanks for blocking
Deyodeyabanow, who is a self-confessed sock of Evlekis, but he needs to have his TPA revoked (as can be seen on his talk page), the other three I mentioned on ZZuuzz's talkpage (
see this) are also Evlekis, and need the usual treatment (i.e. indeff plus removed TPA and email).
Have a good day! - Tom
|
Thomas.W
talk
16:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's discretionary sanctions review process.
The Arbitration Committee has concluded the 2021-22 review of the contentious topics system (formerly known as discretionary sanctions), and its final decision is viewable at the revision process page. As part of the review process, the Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
The above proposals that are supported by an absolute majority of unrecused active arbitrators are hereby enacted. The drafting arbitrators (CaptainEek, L235, and Wugapodes) are directed to take the actions necessary to bring the proposals enacted by this motion into effect, including by amending the procedures at WP:AC/P and WP:AC/DS. The authority granted to the drafting arbitrators by this motion expires one month after enactment.
The Arbitration Committee thanks all those who have participated in the 2021-22 discretionary sanctions review process and all who have helped bring it to a successful conclusion. This motion concludes the 2021-22 discretionary sanctions review process.
This motion initiates a one-month implementation period for the updates to the contentious topics system. The Arbitration Committee will announce when the initial implementation of the Committee's decision has concluded and the amendments made by the drafting arbitrators in accordance with the Committee's decision take effect. Any editors interested in the implementation process are invited to assist at the implementation talk page, and editors interested in updates may subscribe to the update list.
For the Arbitration Committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
TY for the quick action in helping to protect Gudie Hutchings. — Moops ⋠ T⋡ 01:45, 15 December 2022 (UTC) |
Hi and happy holidays! I just created the biography on Henriette Willemina Crommelin and thought it might interest you. Perhaps you have access to some additional sources? No worries if you're busy with other things. -- Rosiestep ( talk) 14:55, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
I thought the vandalism was over already! Guess not., sadly. Thankfully, it's been suppressed, ECP applied. Sarrail (talk) 22:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
2603:6011:7501:7862:78A5:31BF:9575:397D
I had a reference for my edits Guardians delay Progressive Field renovations until after 2023 | wkyc.com, but I could not get the reference to format correctly. Any help that you could provide in this matter would be greatly appreciated!!!!!!!!!! Saved by God's grace ( talk) 03:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Hi there. You recently protected the article Deanna Lynn Wulff because of BLP violations by a string of IP editors. BD2412 has now also protected the AfD page because of IP vote-stacking.
Another IP has now left comments on the article talk page (after deleting a comment from a bot about a file deletion). I wasn't sure if talk pages are by default excluded from page protection, but that looks to be the case. I wasn't sure if reverting the comments was the right thing to do, so instead I moved the IP comments after restoring the deleted text from the bot.
Given that all these IPs geolocate to the San Francisco area, I think it's reasonable to assume that they have been WP:CANVASSed to edit this article and the AfD debate. Is there anything else actionable beyond what's already been done? -- Drm310 🍁 ( talk) 03:51, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
What? Drmies not a big fan of the TRUTH!! Meh. Think K-state has a chance against The Crimson Tide in the Sugar Bowl? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 17:31, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello. I was wondering if you could revoke the TPA of the IP in question. Thank you. SunilNevlaFan ✨ 21:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Not sure if you might be able to add to here? Seems like frustrations are boiling over a bit with the current situation. Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
I've been noticing lately that User:JosephWC keeps adding unsourced content to Wikipedia pages such as Johnny Blaze and Killer Croc, and refusing to provide an explanation nor sourcing for any of them. Every time someone undoes their edits for proper reasons, such as their lack of sources, they counter undo as soon as possible with no explanation at all. Plus, I left a message on their talk page asking them to provide context for their edits and their disagreements with me, and they removed it outright and still refused to explain themselves. I could really use some help in resolving this situation before it escalates too far. Blazewing16 ( talk) 23:46, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Of course they're vandalizing on their talk page after you blocked them. Could you remove their TPA, please? LilianaUwU ( talk / contribs) 01:15, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Much respect for you but think you went off half cocked, Mackensen seems to have misled you into thinking that the bibliography was all that was edited. This isn't about adding a bibliography, that would be ridiculous. Horse Eye's Back ( talk) 18:39, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
The article Aaron Santcroos has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
subject fails to meet the relevant notability guideline
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. In particular, the
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot ( talk) 10:00, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! |
![]() |
|
Hello, Drmies. I saw that you revoked the talk page access of 69.127.80.35 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS). Was this a mistake? The IP's recent edits were to remove trolling by another IP [ 90.254.33.32 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS), blocked by Ad Orientem] from their talk page. If this were intentional, it's concerning: we've effectively allowed a user's taunts to get another's talk page access removed ... Sdrqaz ( talk) 02:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Whatever you celebrate at this time of year, whether it's Christmas or some other festival, I hope you and those close to you have a happy, restful time! Have fun, Donner60 ( talk) 00:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)}} |
![]() |
Hello Drmies: From high in the Canadian Arctic I hope you enjoy the holiday season, Quviasukvik, the Winter or Summer solstice, Christmas, Eid, Diwali, Hogmanay, Hanukkah or even the Saturnalia, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 06:52, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello Drmies: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, RV ( talk) 07:58, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
user Raj172027 is removing and reverting many contents of different articles which has citations to it and have relavent information about article in it. Please take serious actions against the user as i had already tried to solve the matter over user talk but still he removing content from articles using his own free will. Piyush Negi 07:46, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
He is not giving a proper reason for removing contents of the article and doing so just for his personal grudge against me. Piyush Negi 07:49, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
I had joined wikipedia around 4 years ago and i loved to edit articles here and never violates any terms and policies of wikipedia, but since user Raj172027 joined wikipedia 2 months ago he tried to remove my edits without a citation and a valid reason. Piyush Negi 08:05, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy Holidays | |
Hello, I wish you the very best during the holidays. And I hope you have a very happy 2023! Bruxton ( talk) 18:57, 25 December 2022 (UTC) |
Hello, Drmies! Thank you for your work to maintain and improve Wikipedia! Wishing you a
Merry Christmas and a
Happy New Year!
CAPTAIN RAJU
(T)
23:03, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 23:03, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
On 10 December 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lynching of Orion Anderson, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Orion Anderson, who was murdered by a lynch mob in Virginia in 1889, was recently found to have been only 14 years old at the time of his death? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lynching of Orion Anderson. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Lynching of Orion Anderson), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:03, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() | |
happy new year |
---|
Thank you for that. Thank you also for the swiftest DYK review in a decade. The slowest is Talia Or, and where I reached the end of my expression in English is Concentricities, - perhaps you could cast an eye on that one? Let's try my English here: when a subject is John Miller, we need something to be added to make it unusual, but when the subject is already unusual, isn't that enough to qualify for the new rule that replaced "interesting to a broad audience"? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:40, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
User:Cielquiparle, I am not happy with that new hook, and I was completely unaware of it--pinging me would have been the decent thing to do. It really took the sting out of the horrible event. Please do not do that to me again. Drmies ( talk) 17:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
The Purple Barnstar | |
I never saw such commitment to Wikipedia despite the constant harrassment from vandals. Keep it up. LilianaUwU ( talk / contribs) 06:05, 28 December 2022 (UTC) |
Back in May 2021 you removed talk page access, rightly in my opinion, from a blocked editor called Tympanus. I had myself previously declined an unblock request from the editor. They have now posted an unblock request at UTRS. I am not totally impressed by the request, but it does not repeat the kinds of problematic things which led to your removal of talk page access, and while I am not about to accept the current request, I am inclined to restore talk page access, and give them a chance to post an unblock request there. Any thoughts? JBW ( talk) 22:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
This is UTRS appeal #67374
What say ye? -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 22:50, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
![]() |
Best wishes for the holidays | |
Wishing you and yours the best over the holiday season, and here's hoping 2023 won't bring as much global trauma as 2020, the worse 2021 [9] & fecking 2022! Ceoil ( talk) 16:06, 30 December 2022 (UTC) |
Drmies,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
—
Moops ⋠
T⋡
22:58, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠ T⋡ 22:58, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Drmies,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Abishe (
talk)
03:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Abishe ( talk) 03:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy New Year! | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy New Year, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free and may Janus light your way. Ealdgyth ( talk) 13:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC) |
Hey Drmies, season's greetings! When you have a moment, could you let us have your thoughts at Talk:Cyber Anakin#Cyber Anakin's involvement in identifying the man harassing female chess players? Hope all is well with you and yours! (And a certain disgraced dragon sends you good wishes.) Best, Andreas JN 466 21:10, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Apologies, I had erred on the side of caution that the address might have changed hands since the last block. :)
Either way, am reminded to stop by to say Happy New Year and all the best to you for 2023. -- Euryalus ( talk) 22:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
Drmies,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable
New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. See
this for background context.
Mhhossein
talk
07:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Mhhossein talk 07:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
On 4 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fuccboi (novel), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Fuccbois' crew won awards, while Fuccboi's prose received both praise and criticism? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fuccbois. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Fuccboi (novel)), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
BorgQueen ( talk) 00:03, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mikemikev Doug Weller talk 10:15, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, I just wanted to apologize if my reverts at Historical negationism recently were unhelpful. I was patrolling recent changes for possible vandalism and sometimes I move a little too quickly while reverting, without taking the edit into context. I'm trying to do better in the future. Thank you for your hard work on Wikipedia and happy New Year. Herbfur (Eric, He/Him) ( talk) 03:44, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi, would you mind beefing up the rangeblock referenced here [10]. They are now extending their vandalism to other pages outside the ones listed in their block. - Who is John Galt? ✉ 15:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
On 4 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Fuccbois, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Fuccbois' crew won awards, while Fuccboi's prose received both praise and criticism? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Fuccbois. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Fuccbois), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
BorgQueen ( talk) 00:02, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Hook update | |
Your hook reached 17,154 views (714.7 per hour), making it one of the most viewed hooks of January 2023 – nice work! |
GalliumBot ( talk • contribs) (he/ it) 03:27, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2022).
I'm sorry. I missed this at first. I apologize if I troubled you.
You don't think that putting a date label helps with understanding what's in Talk? I did it to help understand how recent those posts were. The content is still clear. Too bad there isn't an automatic date function along with the title.
I'm sure you also noticed I grouped the 3 Vertabedian sections together.
I've a strong interest in organizing info, hence the To-Dos. I think discussing organization and article needs is a very good idea. The article has come a long way in the last few months, and I think it's looking pretty good (but there always seem to be more needs!).
I'm not trying to steamroll anybody; I just want to make things better. Robert92107 ( talk) 05:09, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
No insult intended, and none taken. (right?) Nice to meet you.
Your edit comment there says -- (in part) -- "Rv commentary". I did not think that anyone would consider explaining the meaning of a phrase to be an instance of op-ed. (Did you read my edit comment?) By the way, that phrase seems to have a different meaning in the US Congress ["House of Representatives"] than ... the meaning at ... item number "[4]" under Agenda (meeting)#Standard Order of Business.
Your edit comment there says -- (in part) -- "this is unnecessary".
I did not insist that it was necessary ... at least, not in the sense that, if something had remained ambiguous, and if it were therefore (even 'slightly') possible for someone to misunderstand it, that the world the wiki would explode. I just thought that, it would be better, if a small change were added, to remove the ambiguity.
Thanks for listening (reading this). Mike Schwartz ( talk) 16:05, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
Please sir believe that🙏🙏 Khelna Bari page not only me but many other editors have improved the page. Many think that I am a member of Zee Bangla. But that is not the case sir, I have edited many pages apart from Zee Bangla. I create pages for series that I know well about. But believe me sir I have never added wrong information to any page and never let anyone do it. No one can accept that I have moved to the main page by improving the continuous underdeveloped pages of many editors. So sir, one request to you🙏🙏 is to protect the Khelna Bari page. Because I am saying with revise that the reliable source that is added to this page has the depth of the source clearly passes WP:NTV with sufficient WP:GNG. Nilpriyo ( talk) 1:46, 7 January 2023.
I ask your advice about editor Nilpriyo. Nilpriyo has a remarkable interest in Zee Bangla and their programs. To such an extend that it makes my uneasy. Off course, it is possible that Nilpriyo is just a superfan but other options are also possible. Especially this edit shows off red flags and set my alarm bells off. And this edit is not helping either as removed the prod from several of its own articles. Is it a good idea to go to the COI-notice board, based on his edit history? The Banner talk 17:14, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, thank you for the advice here. I share The Banner's concern about this editor.
To show that they are an SPA account for Zee Bangla, the last 10 articles that they have edited are all Zee Bangla shows: Ei Poth Jodi Na Sesh Hoy, Gouri Elo, Tomar Khola Hawa, Ranga Bou, Bodhisattwor Bodhbuddhi, Khelna Bari, Tomar Khola Hawa, List of programmes broadcast by Zee Bangla, Mon Dite Chai and Tara (TV series). The first five articles they edited (when the account was created in November 2020) are: Zee Bangla, Agnipariksha (2009 TV series), , Karunamoyee Rani Rashmoni, Krishnakoli, Bagh Bondi Khela (TV series).
My concern is that their behaviour seems quite disruptive:
Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 23:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | |
happy new year |
---|
just my mother's birthday - she introduced me to music -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:34, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm on vacation, - click on songs! I tell my own stories now, instead of relying on DYK. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Trust the next lot of the same number are as much fun JarrahTree 13:23, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
[14] I could be very wrong, but I see some element of WP:OWN and a few other possession of the truth issues, nothing but the facts ma'am, it's probably not worth immediate action, but a FYI is tendered here. JarrahTree 12:28, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
RE: [15]. Rather than just reverting, I figured better to discuss directly. Is the phrase "served as" a euphemism? Blindly estimating, but at least 95% of our articles on politicians use this term, so I think the consensus-in-practice is in favor of it. Curbon7 ( talk) 14:06, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to updates on the Arbitration Committee's contentious topics procedure revision process.
In December, the Arbitration Committee adopted the contentious topics procedure, which replaces the former discretionary sanctions system. The contentious topics procedure is now in effect following an initial implementation period.
The drafting arbitrators warmly thank all those who have worked to implement the new procedure during this implementation period and beyond. KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 19:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
On 18 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Bulkboek, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Bulkboeken ('bulk books') were cheap reprints of Dutch literary classics, published from 1971 to the late 1990s, and again from 2007? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Bulkboek. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Bulkboek), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
BorgQueen ( talk) 12:02, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Check out the geolocation of the IP in the CU log for Tailsultimatefan3891, along with their contribution history. Or the overlap at Requests for decrease in protection here. The more I dig, the duckier it gets.-- Ponyo bons mots 23:23, 19 January 2023 (UTC) ...and they all edit Wikivoyage. Who the hell edits Wikivoyage?-- Ponyo bons mots 23:31, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
Ugh.
Liliana
UwU (
)
10:58, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi there, I wanted to ask you to take a look at the recent history of Isaac Asante and Muhamed Tijani. I am having an issue with an editor called Soares1967 who has continually reverted my edits of their very poorly written (often grammatically incorrect at very basic levels—improper spacing, sentence fragments, etc.) edits. I have repeatedly left edit summaries explaining my edits, and I have also left two comments on their Talk page, along with two other editors saying similar things. The user has never responded to any of the comments, and they continue to make the same incorrect edits mentioned in the Talk page comments and revert corrections thereto. I don't want to get into an edit war with this user, but they never leave edit summaries and more often than not leave articles much worse than how they found them, occasionally making them outright senseless in their wake. I feel like I have run out of options beyond seeking the advice of an admin. I appreciate any help you can give me. Anwegmann ( talk) 00:13, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
You might be interested in Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Prohibition on the locking of user talk pages. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 19:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 54, November – December 2022
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 14:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
I am going to revert your recent edit on this article, mainly because the redirect is not accurate and 28 years out of date but I feel the redirecting to Ferrari 488 would still not be a useful redirect either. I will not edit war if you feel the need to. -- Falcadore ( talk) 02:15, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Drmies,
I saw that you once deleted this draft article as the creation of a sockpuppet so I'm hoping you can check this latest version to see if it is also the product of a block-evading editor. I see I once gave it protection but the page lost it when it was created and deleted subsequent to the protection being imposed. Thanks, in advance, for your help. Liz Read! Talk! 16:57, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
You might want to take a look at what's unfolding there... seems like folks aren't seeing what you're seeing, and we may end up with a situation where the correct policy-based option is the exact opposite of the physical "consensus". I have no idea what we're supposed to do in such an instance. Taking Out The Trash ( talk) 15:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi there. Hope the new year has been treating you well. Not sure if you recall much about this user's block log. They started this recent thread Talk:2023_Half_Moon_Bay_shootings#Trying_to_hide_the_simple_truth_that_the_killer's_connection_with_China_is_a_dishonest_joke. Is this POV pushing worthy of an on the spot indef, given their history, or just let it play out? I've got no prior history with them. — Bagumba ( talk) 14:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
On 27 January 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tarn Wadling, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the now-drained lake Tarn Wadling was famous as a liminal place where the spectre of Guinevere's dead mother appeared to her and Gawain in The Awntyrs off Arthure? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tarn Wadling. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Tarn Wadling), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
-- RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Please round the coordinates obtained from Google, as I have done for the Tarn Wadling article. Google has taken to providing 16 digit coordinates in what is believed to be a copyright trap scheme. That level of precision is in the 1/100th of a micrometre range. Abductive ( reasoning) 01:05, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello Drmies. Just wanted to ask a general question as you are an admin and may be able to answer. If I were to falsely claim that I was previously an administrator and mediator on Wikipedia, am I liable to face any penalties? What can be done about this situation? starship .paint ( exalt) 16:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, I wanted to ask for clarification on the page Addiction Rare in Patients Treated with Narcotics, which I created years ago and which you just semi-protected due to persistent sockpuppetry. I just got a message on my talk page from someone, presumably the sockpuppeteer in question, complaining about how constructive edits to the page were being wrongly reverted. I wanted to get some idea of what kind of disruptive/unhelpful edits the sockpuppets have been engaging in on the article. IntoThinAir ( talk) 01:05, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 23:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I'm following up on an ANI post of mine from October in which you blocked an IP user that is making false death claims. They seem to be active after the block on 2804:D45:9600:0:0:0:0:0/40 ( block range · block log ( global) · WHOIS (partial)) and last edited 2 days ago. Would appreciate another block. wizzito | say hello! 23:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
. . . is undoubtedly correct based on the present article, but I have removed it and notified two projects to see if they can access a couple of sources which exceed my skills. [19] If no one comes forward in a reasonable time (one month?) I will have no objection to its deletion. Best wishes, Kablammo ( talk) 17:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2023).
What has woollen socks and lawn tennis to do with reverting the article on pine phone? BP OMowe ( talk) 17:54, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi there, User:92.14.216.40/ User:88.110.119.210 has largely been restricting themself to the belligerent haunting of the Talk:2023 page, now as User:88.110.119.72, an IP blocked for similar disruptive engagement there a couple of weeks back. (They have form on current-year articles, e.g. [20], [21].) Ludicrously, they claim never to have been blocked then, presumbaly realising they forgot to hop to a new IP, that the previous blockee was not them, despite making identical points. Mutt Lunker ( talk) 00:51, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, could you please delete this while you're at it? Thanks. Silikonz 💬 20:01, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
Based on the information in UTRS appeal #69221 and after investigating with my checkuser glasses, I'd like to soften the block on the IP address involved, such that it is anon-only. Happy to provide more information if you wish. My opinion takes into account the specific nature of the IP address involved. -- Yamla ( talk) 14:24, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
I didn't know you were a new editor. Certainly explains a lot.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 01:36, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, I wanted to follow-up on a block you made on a user for POV editing. They seem to be continuing this behavior [22], [23] at Talk:2023 China balloon incident, citing/hinting at conspiracy theories relating to the COVID-19 pandemic, per Talk:COVID-19 pandemic#Current consensus, item [14]. Would appreciate if you could take a look. Carter00000 ( talk) 17:16, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
Im not sure if Im supposed to leave a notice or not but to be safe, I mentioned you at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Softlemonades in a discussion about me and Cambial Yellowing Softlemonades ( talk) 14:10, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Ha!-- Bbb23 ( talk) 21:05, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
I see you just about everywhere - fighting vandals, making the tough calls on blocking, and thoroughly attempting to help by investigating and going the extra mile on some cases. I think you truly are a tireless contributor, and you fully deserve this beautiful rotating star. Bar Harel ( talk) 04:52, 9 February 2023 (UTC) |
See this. If for some reason I'm incorrect or wrong, please accept my sincere apologies in advance and please revert. :-) ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 05:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Hey, any chance you could revdel this edit? It's got my real name in it, and while I'm not super secretive (and isn't an entire surprise considering my username), it's still not cool per WP:OUTING. The fact that it was part of a rant about me reverting an edit sourced to a Fandom wiki doesn't make me like it any better. oknazevad ( talk) 23:30, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
<Previous discussion blanked and will be revdel'd> Thanks to everybody who were in other time zones or up later, who helped out. The important thing is to contact the emergency staff at the WMF, since they can start the real-world processes according to protocols that can address the real-world problem. Everything we do on-wiki is just clean-up, and we must be mindful of privacy for minors, whether they're abusing the project for horrible jokes, or are in genuine crisis. Having a fair amount of experience with this sort of thing, including back in the do-it-yourself days, I have an essay in mind that might clarify the issues involved. Acroterion (talk) 13:24, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Linking that, or continuing with the eternal looping back to the Arb case from 2009, I consider that to be a form of harassment when it happens on-wiki, and as you know I have acted against it on a number of occasions.
[24]
You mean like this? And this? And of course he did immediately after I asked him not to do exactly THAT [25] Volunteer Marek 18:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, mind protecting this article? I put a request at RFPP but its becoming a bit of a battle. IPs (and one registered account) are stating he is dead but I found nothing about it via a Google search. S0091 ( talk) 22:03, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Drmies, Regarding wiki article "2022 Nord Stream pipeline sabotage" [26]; Seymour Hersh posted a subject matter, that includes unsubstantiated allegations against a living person, in a blog post on the social media blog Substack [27]. RS report that Hersh's subject matter about the living person and others include details that media outlets have not verified and have not corroborated [28] [29].
Wiki editors used those RS (that I cited above) and then posted very indepth paragraph of Hersh's unsubstantiated allegations against the living person and others. I'm emphasizing subject matter because it seems to me that his subject matter in his blog is
WP:UNDUE & may be even
WP:LIVING. Since Hersh didn't publish his piece in a news blog (which sometimes may be an RS), but rather he put a social media blog post it may be
WP:NOTRS and
WP:QS. I feel his social media blog post is not an acceptable source under
WP:SPS "social media postings are largely not acceptable as sources"
Now here's where my confusion lies and where I hope you can educate me. On the talk page, some have said that since RS have reported on Hersh writing a blog post (not verifying the subject matter), that "we can and should certainly report on this important voice (since it's been reported in secondary sources) while avoiding a judgement whether it's correct or not."
[30].
In this case if feel "it's" means the blog post, not the subject matter. I guess what I'm asking is, 1) Do we write an entire paragraph outlining, in detail, unsubstantiated allegations against a living person and others that are posted on a social media blog, or 2) Do we only include such social media blog posts when RS report on the actual subject matter that stemmed from the blog post? I know this is confusing so I thank you in advance for any time you spend on this. Best regards~ BetsyRMadison ( talk) 19:31, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
...have you been upsetting? - See Mitchell Haynes gave Drmeis Cannabis ( talk · contribs) :D 10mmsocket ( talk) 17:13, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
I know you are a reasonable and respected editor. Would you have a moment to look at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#RFC on Minneapolis cuisine image. I'm not sure this person knows what they are doing, and I'm wondering if it should be procedurally closed. I was threatened with a block if I didn't remove a photo, and then the very photo she threatened me over is included in the RFC. And most of the RFC was already decided in an RFC two months ago, but the photo she wanted was decided against, so she included it in this new RFC. I'm not sure if this is forum shopping. I understand if you don't want to get involved. Thanks. Magnolia677 ( talk) 23:44, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Magnolia, certainly your first sentence is very true and greatly appreciated. Sandy, you have to admit--that's a good move. But Magnolia, what you pointed out as a threat, well that's not really a threat--Sandy is not an administrator (right?) and if she were she wouldn't be able to do anything pertaining to you given the mutual involvement. So, rather than a threat, it's a possible course of action. I cannot gauge to which extent such an effort might be successful. You know I appreciate your work here, and I hope we'll do more of it.
I looked at the RfC. I also think it's a bit complicated but they're always complicated, if it's not a simple yes or no to one question. Still, if I had to close it, I think I could figure it out. What I would leave out is the stuff about the other articles--I think you were pointing at another place, with a picture, etc., and I don't know what to do with that. What I'm really hoping for is that you (both of you, I guess) see the best in each other's edits, but that's kind of saccharine of me, knowing and appreciating both of you, and thus already being somewhat involved but torn. Still, a different RfC on a similar but sufficiently different topic, even if it was only a few months ago, I wouldn't have a problem with that. I try to think of RfCs not as things one wins or loses, but as processes that hopefully lead to article improvement, and so I do think you probably need to pull back a bit. Magnolia--I really do appreciate you as an editor. Drmies ( talk) 17:40, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Drmies. I just read your reply regarding No-kill shelter and I am sorry for the oversight. I had noticed a very large edit from an IP user that was unsourced and with what appeared as a non-NPOV edit summary. My intention was to quickly remedy the situation and it is clear I acted too fast, despite my best intentions. Thanks for pointing it out and please know it's noted. Ppt91 ( talk) 03:18, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
You know [33]] see my talk page and Gamaliels. Doug Weller talk 16:28, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello Drmies, I've removed the " Bejrisch case request", as it was declined by a majority of the committee as premature. Let me know if you have any questions. Moneytrees🏝️ (Talk) 21:20, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Holocaust in Poland and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.
Thanks, GeneralNotability ( talk) 20:11, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi drmies,
I reckon this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Rational_Software_Architect&oldid=1099667592 was over-zealous.
I agree the article was pretty much an ad for an old product. But that product is not UML, it's a tool that people might use or might have used to create UML models. I suggest a one sentence or one paragraph description of the product on Rational Software, and Rational Software Architect should redirect there.
What do you think? Paul Foxworthy ( talk) 01:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Did you mean to create this page in the User: namespace? I don't think I've ever seen that template used in the main space. — Mainframe98 talk 18:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
I don't know the "code," but what's the frequency, Kevin. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 20:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Drmies,
You deleted Big Kidd as being the work of a block-evading editor and now a new editor has created Talk:Big Kidd objecting to the deletion. Can you use your CU goggles to see if this is a new incarnation of the previous editor? Many thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 02:41, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, Juanochoa1234567$ ( talk · contribs) who you partially blocked from List of Asian countries by population is just making the same edit in multiple other articles, and repeatedly pushing Russian nationalist talking points on the talk pages. I don't think the partial block is going to cover it. See here and here for the latest. 25stargeneral ( talk) 02:26, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Further to comments at user talk:Nilpriyo, unfortunately I haven't kept a list of all the apparently related accounts that I have seen, but a very quick check of editing history produced the following small selection: Its.com85, Itsrik7, Siddhartha sengupta2001, & Nilpriyo. The promotional nature of the editing looks like COI/UPE, but if so it's very incompetently done. It may be a group of fans. I really don't know. Whatever the situation there is enough promotional editing, incompetence, lack of cooperation etc, that probably blocking all the accounts is the best option in the long run. JBW ( talk) 09:44, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
An Anon editor suddenly popped into the talk page at 2022 Nords Stream [34] to target me & only me to personally attack by using insults, name calling, & very disparaging comments about me. [35] [36] I have a feeling that the anon editor may be a sockpuppet (and possibly a sock of an editor on that page). Anyway, Can you tell me how I can find out if they're a sockpuppet or troll so I can get them banned from that page due to their disruptive & disparaging comments about me? I thank you in advance for any help you can give me, and best regards~ BetsyRMadison ( talk) 16:30, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Vast history of disruptive edit warring and personal attacks from a user at 42.190.128.0/18 (+ more IP ranges). Thank you.
For your specific case, refer to User talk:Drmies/Archive 142#Belligerent/edit warring IP
AP 499D25 ( talk) 23:57, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
Vast history of disruptive edit warring and personal attacks from a user at 42.190.128.0/18 (+ more IP ranges). Thank you.
—DIYeditor (
talk)
00:04, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, I see that on 31 Jan you blocked User:Serratra as a sock of User:Jettew10222. I am seeing some behavioral evidence that active user User:Dinglepincter is the same user. For example, compare Serratra's nonsensical Computing Reference Desk answer here to Dinglepincter's latest one here. Also both users tend to post erroneous/misleading answers at the Teahouse, such as Serratra's here and Dinglepincter's here. Dinglepincter has been warned about this by User:Cullen328 here and User:David notMD here.
Apologies if this should have been posted at SPI; I'm not very familiar with that process, and could not see how to add a new suspected sock to an existing investigation. CodeTalker ( talk) 00:34, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, Good day. I come here to seek advice on editor who is a journalist that uses their company as the source (independent, reliable source (IRS) where by the article is written by their collogue) to support the content added. (note: other journalist in their company wrote the article and they claim they do not have any association with the subject of the article). In short editor/journalist using their company as source to add in the article which info is the same as other IRS indicated as well Would this kind of edit is considered association promotion/advertising their company indirectly and/or any other violation of any type in such edit? Cassiopeia talk 03:06, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi I reworded my comment on the arbcom case. Once I saw your ping even before I read it I realised I made a mistake while trying to be too succinct. Sorry for the confusion, my question was directed at arbcom not you, I only brought you up as an example since you mentioned you were a sitting arbitrator but listed as a party. I didn't look at the details as I'm not likely to look at the paper itself.
But since you mentioned you were a sitting arbitrator I wonder if the apparent incongruity between you being a party and the list excluding current and former sitting arbitrators was that anyone who was an arbitrator at the time of any conduct mentioned in the paper was excluded. This would also explain the word choice "who are or were sitting Arbs" rather than "who are or were Arbs".
Or as I've now considered, and especially if you were sitting at the time of the conduct discussed, perhaps any conduct from someone acting as an arbitrator i.e. e.g. an arbcom case or whatever was excluded. But conduct by someone acting as an administrator or even as an individual editor was included even if they were an arbitrator at the time.
(As unfair as this may seem I can see the logic in this. We may re-asses the details of a case but we're very reluctant to assess the behaviour of people acting as arbitrators except in exceptional circumstances. Given the risk it seems like a new committee punishing former arbitrators for stuff we don't link. And that they're given a specific time limited role by the community.)
I struck out my earlier comment figuring it was the easiest way to reduce confusion given the short time it had been there. And as said in my edit summary feel free to strike or remove your comment if you feel it best.
Nil Einne ( talk) 01:55, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Drmies, I've been keeping an eye on the list above. Last night, user Ahmetger again tried to vandalise the page by reinstating his last version by leaving a meaningless edit summary Another block wouldn't be exaggerated as he has repeated his old habits, even after a block. Eem dik doun in toene ( talk) 07:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Drmies,
I guess because you are the nominator here, that would make you an involved editor. But maybe one of your fellow CUers watches this talk page and could check out two of the contributors to this AFD who had never edited Wikipedia before but want this article to be Kept. Tres suspicious. Liz Read! Talk! 03:14, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Back in 2017, you participated in a discussion about which projects to mention in Jonathan Karp's biography. I've submitted an edit request to include mention of some the books for which he was the principal acquirer and publisher, as verified in secondary coverage summarizing his career. I'm hoping you might be willing to contribute to the ongoing discussion, or review any of the other edit requests I've submitted at Talk:Jonathan Karp. Thanks in advance for any assistance! Inkian Jason ( talk) 19:24, 21 February 2023 (UTC)