![]() | 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 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | Archive 53 |
I have seen you active on this at the talk page HistoryofIran and I am having a long standing issue at the YPG which Turkey sees as terrorist but their NATO allies nor the EU not etc. I suggest an ECP for the People's Defense Units, where an IP wants the POV template at the top of the article seemingly for not having included that the EU, USA, Australia etc. classify the YPG as terrorist as you can see from this discussion downwards. They were invited to provide sources for such an inclusion, but my patience has its limits which comes when there is a remedy like ARBECR. The word terrorist gets included every now and then anyway by some other IP... Talk page access should not be removed if possible as maybe someone has new insights worth their inclusion. Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 12:17, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
A long time ago, I did something (don't ask me what it was because I haven't been able to figure it out now) that changed the way contribution histories look. If there are consecutive edits by the same user, instead of showing each entry, it collapses them and shows the number of consecutive edits in brackets to the left, e.g., [3]. If you click on Prev, it shows the changes made by all 3 edits, and if you wish to revert all 3 by clicking on Vandalism, you can. This last part works only if the consecutive edits are the latest edits on the page. If you wish to uncollapse them so that you see all 3 entries, you click on the bracketed number.
In the last few days, although it shows everything normally, I cannot revert all 3 edits after I click on Prev. I can still click on the normal Rollback but then I can't automatically warn the user for vandalism.
I vaguely recollect that you showed me this "feature" years ago to help me out when patrolling WP:AN3, and I was hoping you could help. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 17:21, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Multiple "new users" have attempted to change referenced information in the Etruscan civilization article, from 4 haplotypes to nine/ten haplotypes.
This has been sporadic enough to avoid page protect. Not sure what can be done, but I felt an Admin should be made aware of this. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 01:54, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ed, I hope all is well with you. We've been having trouble with a single purpose account user (an appropriate double-meaning), Calvin Bryant, Florida, whose sole purpose in editing WP is to add his artwork to articles for self promotion. Here are his global contributions, which doesn't include all of them. As you can see, this has been going on since May 2019. He's been asked repeatedly to stop, but he's very persistent in re-adding them when they're reverted. This is getting really tiresome. Carlstak ( talk) 03:58, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Hey, I have a request. I don't know if you've noticed but Butwhatdoiknow has been making - or attempting to make - changes to WP:EW. They have to do with one section of the policy. If you look at the revision history, you'll see what changes have actually been made and the latest change they want to make, which I reverted. They want to discuss the issue, even though, in my view, I've already discussed it, and I didn't enjoy the earlier discussions at all. Anyway, AFAIK, no administrator other than me has participated in the discussions. I'd appreciate it if you'd tell me what you think, at least of the latest change. Don't worry. I won't be a bit offended if you disagree with me. I just need another opinion of someone who knows the policy and enforces it. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 01:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm not sure why this discussion is taking place here but if that is how Bbb23 wants to proceed then I'm okay with it for now. Currently in dispute is not about "changes," but one particular change. Here's the history related to that particular change:
So here's my question for EdJohnston: In your opinion, does my edit worsen the flow, not affect the flow, or improve the flow? If you wish, feel free to reply at Wikipedia talk:Edit warring#Flow. - Butwhatdoiknow ( talk) 06:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello. Hope you're doing well. I was wondering if you could change the target at Noor Pahlavi because it's currently redirected to Reza Pahlavi, Crown Prince of Iran#Noor Pahlavi, but no such section exists within her father's article. I think the more appropriate target would be Reza Pahlavi, Crown Prince of Iran#Relationships and marriage, which is where the page on her sister Iman Pahlavi redirects to. I would have done this myself but since you have fully protected the page it's impossible for me to modify it. Thanks. Keivan.f Talk 21:27, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
I see that your warning at User talk:Chitral view#Please respond and explain why you should not be blocked hasn't stopped that incorrigible hijacker. - David Biddulph ( talk) 18:04, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Per this discussion, can Battle of Capakhchur be deleted? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 13:50, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | Happy adminship anniversary! Hi EdJohnston! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:34, 20 February 2023 (UTC) |
![]() |
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Dom Aleixo (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. BilledMammal ( talk) 22:37, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ed. I believe at one point you talked to me to come talk to you again if I could find more founding of an IP abusing several accounts to avoid bans via adding unsourced content and somewhat. (From years ago:[ here)
So far I have found they have since been editing under the IP, but as well as several accounts including User:68.129.15.71, User:Akmadomad, User:BigBoyWilliams, User:HerbLightman, User:EuroHorrorGuy, and User:FrankensteinsDad. Here are some quick previous blocks here and here. The user removes material that declared uneeded here (against WP:FILMRELEASE), and have responded to unsourced content or usage of multiple account stating it was a quick mistake or they would find the sources later, then removing any comments on their talk page involving warnings or questions here, here, here, and here.
I know in the past you asked for a smoking gun related to this incident, and I believe outside their very similar talk pages, favored articles (older genre films and their actors), the biggest smoking gun is one of these users removing the warnings from another users article. Here is HerbLightman removing warning tags about being blocked from EuroHorrorGuy's articles. here, here, here and several others in late February 2022.
The user has been active on the site for years and my experience is they have found several loopholes to avoid being block or banned, but have no found a way to contribute to Wikipedia in a consistent constructive manner and has taken to SockPuppetry to avoid general simple bans. How should I approach this? Andrzejbanas ( talk) 07:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello EdJohnston,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Artwork for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
BoyTheKingCanDance ( talk) 04:19, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
At Taiwan thats vandalism by two socks of the same master not an edit war between nationalists. Note that you've locked it on a version that goes against one of the strongest consensuses I know of. Horse Eye's Back ( talk) 03:58, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Hey, Ed. Hope you're well. If you've got some free time, could you check a new SPI I filed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Virgiliosarvanitis. It involves the possible application of a range block.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 18:30, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Hey Ed,
The Tarawih page is having an edit war, where the minority sect of Muslims are editing the page to satisfy their sect. They keep including information that is slandering the page and not keeping its integrity. This is a usual thing during the month of Ramadan. Could you please protect the page to not allow any user to edit the page? We would greatly appreciate it. Thank you! Inaquout ( talk) 18:21, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi, as you are the one who has protected the page, could you make this suggested edit? VSL ( talk) 20:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Is there anything concerning the honorifics over Popes, perhaps similiar to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Islam-related_articles#Islamic_honorifics? I have noticed numerous additions to papal articles with the addition of "His Holiness" in the infobox. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 20:53, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi again, the user "Old houses" continues to edit war despite your block earlier on. They are at three reverts in 24 hours again. I am not engaging them any further on this. I have repeatedly insisted on consensus and talking things out more, and was given personal attacks, more reverts, and threats to create multiple accounts in reply ( 1, 2). ɱ (talk) 05:13, 5 April 2023 (UTC) Edit - and a discussion about difficulties with the user's conduct has continued here. ɱ (talk) 14:24, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
User:Alihd23 has been, since around 20 March, essentially spamming the ethnicity "Persian" into individuals' articles. Some of these article do have ethnicity in the body of the article, but numerous edits have been WP:UNDUE(with multiple ethnicities presented in the body of the articles) or simple additions to the Lead with no source(s) to support "Persian". Is there anything that can be done?
A listing:
User:Alihd23 posted on my talk page asking why I was removing "Persian" to which I informed them of MOS:Ethnicity. Clearly they do not care and resumed adding "Persian" indiscriminately. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 23:25, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
It appears the discussion between Beshogur and Volgabulgaria has reached the realm of personal attacks.
Volgabulgari doubles down with an WP:Aspersion that Beshogur blocked "my"? and "my friend's account"(Karak1l1c). I had considered posting a NPA warning on Volgabulgari's talk page, but considering their latest comment towards Beshogur "blocking" them and their friend I felt it would simply exacerbate the situation.
Your thoughts? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 16:55, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
On second thought, you may want to read the entire discussion. Beshogur may have just proved Volgabulgari is meatpuppeting. --
Kansas Bear (
talk)
17:00, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you're the admin who protected People's Anti-Fascist Front - could you add an NPOV dispute tag to the article? There's a dispute over some newly added content, such as the WP:TERRORIST/ WP:NPOV violation in the very first sentence of the article. Solblaze ( talk) 06:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ed, hope you're doing well. The perennial nuisance and recurrent pain the Mosquito guy is back with a new sock puppet, ActiveWindows: same articles, same changes, same bad English in edit summaries. Carlstak ( talk) 19:17, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
You and Kansas Bear have gone on and removed Persian from many actual Persian figures for no reason other than MOS:Ethnicity, which makes no sense.
You haven't removed Greek from Socrates, so why this double standard? Rumi and Ibn-Sina are ethnically Persian, and worked in Persian. MOS:Ethnicity has no merit here, as their heritage is very relevant to the figures in question. Even Britannica lists Ibn-Sina as a Persian, and is explained in detail by User:alidoostzadeh. Rumi's page has discussed this thoroughly already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:55DF:FC8A:8C6D:42C2:1616:4D24 ( talk) 02:21, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
Hey, could you please lock this article: Levantine cuisine, so that only 500/30 editors can edit it? Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 06:11, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Good afternoon @ EdJohnston. I'd seen you've protected Elizabetta Gonzaga's article due to vandalism by 176.200.142.92 and 151.57.174.55. I would like to inform you that both IPs are in fact the LTA abuser Livioandronico2013, who had uploaded with multiple sockpuppets a lot of photographs of famous paintings, sculptures and buildings from Italy and, sometimes, from other parts of the world. Now, recently, they're vandalizing Guidobaldo da Montefeltro –via another IP– for impose its version among other good faith contributions by other users. I'd just reverted him to stable varsion, but he's maybe going to undid me in a near future, like he did with Elizabetta Gonzaga. Could you please protect the article to avoid vandalism by this LTA and, if he continues reverting me, restoring the stable version before his changes, and also restore Elizabetta Gonzaga to this stable version? Thank you in advance for your help and sorry for the inconvenience. Best regards. 81.41.175.237 ( talk) 11:17, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
I wanted to ask your opinion on this one. You blocked them (quite correctly) in 2020, after a pattern of disruption. They've been contributing to Wiktionary since then, apparently without any major issues (they had some self-requested blocks there, but none for cause since 2020), and are willing to agree to a set of conditions I think do address the ways in which they behave disruptively. Given that, would you object to a "last chance" unblock for them, subject of course to those conditions? Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:56, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | Happy First Edit Day! Hi EdJohnston! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:40, 29 May 2023 (UTC) |
![]() |
I am trying to update the GDP of Dhaka city. The original data was created by me but those links are now broken. I see the protection is because of possible "nationalist" motives. I can assure you that I have no such motives. I just sit on the relevant data, scientifically developed, and would like to update the entry. Stakacan ( talk) 20:54, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Greetings. Long time. There's a situation at this IP user page. What's happening is, the same person behind multiple IP accounts keep attacking that user. Now I remember a situation like this several years ago that an anonymous individual was tripping up his cord to change IP addresses just to vandalize at the Sony Pictures article and other pages just to have his way. When you get a chance, please look into this. Thanks. King Shadeed ( talk) 14:04, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
That's not me. I don't know how the check user procedure working but clearly it is false in this case. Blubluman was my sockpuppet and every account in my sockpuppet archives belong to me excluding Historyofarmenia01. But any of these new accounts doesn't belong to me. @ EdJohnston: Is there any chance to prove this? Also why I would take same name for sockpuppetry? It doesn't make any sense. 95.70.246.173 ( talk) 19:02, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
Vizualnoiise ( talk · contribs) has, since 15 April 2023, been removing the mention of Jat ethnicity(referenced by reliable sources) from the Abu Hanifa article.
They have numerous warnings on their talk page, to which I have added a {{3rr}}. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 20:54, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi, Ed. There's an unblock request at UTRS from an editor using the IP address 2600:4040:2929:fb00:642e:8232:70fc:1f68, relating to a block you placed on the /38 range. I am currently editing on my phone, which makes doing a lot of checking fiddly and awkward, so I am much less confident than I would otherwise be, but it looks to me as though blocking 2600:4040:2800::/40 might be enough. Can you have a look, and see what you think? JBW ( talk) 20:53, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
2600:4040:2929:FB00:642E:8232:70FC:1F68 is Verizon Business and the full range would be /24. You can read the complaint that lead to the block
here. Previous attempts to resolve the problem failed. A quick look at the report shows the IP addresses in question this time around are
2600:4040:2836:6200:da5c:97de:5be5:4634 and
2600:4040:2836:6200:42c9:2e2d:7e11:7961 and
2600:4040:282c:ec00:dc18:ba4d:7902:d3a. The smallest range that would capture those addresses would be (calculating calculating calculating)2600:4040:2800:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000/39, only slightly smaller than the blocked range. Now, the report implies these IP addresses were used by the same person. Checkuser data strongly implies the addresses in 2600:4040:2836:6200::/64 are a match; I can't make the same claim about the other addresses. I'm not saying they aren't, though. There's at least one sockpuppeteer operating from this range; privacy requirements prohibit me from identifying them, but they aren't one of the really bad LTA's. A fair number of constructive editors. This person is almost certainly behind other attempts to edit
List of programs broadcast by The CW and
List of Amazon Freevee original programming and
List of Peacock original programming and a few similar articles; I found many attempts across many IP addresses that are
Highly likely to be the same person. I initially hoped semi-protection on a few articles would be sufficient, but it just wouldn't have stopped this user. I believe this user does not have an account (at least, not one that's been active recently).
I see them stable on /64 ranges and then hop to a new one. At the moment, an anon-only block on 2600:4040:2800:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000/42 would catch the ones I'm fairly certain about. I have no reason to believe they are actually confined within that space, though, particularly as checkuser data doesn't go back all that far. A range larger than /64 should be anon-only (as this is). We could play whack-a-mole with /64 blocks but this would only slow them down a little, so a larger range is called for. My gut says a /42 block won't work, it's too narrow. On the other hand, I see no compelling reason to expand the range beyond /38; checkuser logs imply they were targeting other users there.
In summary: /38 is not unreasonable, if anon-only. A smaller /42 range could be tried but my experience shows that wouldn't work. Rapid-response /64 blocks could work but would only be minor speed-bumps. Page protection isn't going to be enough (but could be used in combination). This isn't a specific LTA or at least, not one active via their account recently.
Within the privacy restrictions imposed on me, I'm happy to answer follow-up questions. This was a lot of data to page through and not easy to summarise. -- Yamla ( talk) 20:37, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
Well, thanks to all of you (Ed, Yamla, and Ponyo) for following this up. As I indicated in my original post, I was not by any means confident that my initial impression was right, and it looks as though it definitely wasn't. JBW ( talk) 22:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Ed, I mentioned you at WP:ANI#Martdj, Martin Kulldorff, and odd crusade.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 13:40, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
@Md Sunnat Ali Mollik The account is locked globally. How to get rid of global lock need your help Please suggest what can I do. 45.250.228.45 ( talk) 06:42, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Ástor Piazzolla has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 13 § Ástor Piazzolla until a consensus is reached.
Bgsu98
(Talk)
20:05, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Ed, I stumbled across these two articles( Battle of Bulair & Battle of Kardzhali that mentioned a Andranik Ozanian in their infoboxes, and who does not appear to be mentioned in either article.
Andranik Ozanian appeared in both infoboxes, initially, with a Bulgarian flag next to his name. Certain editors then took it upon themselves to change said flag to the flag of Armenia, blatantly ignoring the fact that Armenia did not exist as a nation state in 1913(battle of Bulair) or 1912(battle of Kardzhali). Maybe these editors should read First Republic of Armenia?
Not sure if these editors are one and the same, a coordinated effort, or just coincidence. I have refrained from posting warnings since I have no idea what warning(s) to post on their talk pages. Sorry to have such a convoluted issue, but maybe some fresh eyes can see this better than me. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 17:10, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi Edj, Hope you're doing well. Please address this request once. Fade258 ( talk) 16:12, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
I wasn't sure if I was allowed to continue the conversation on there once it was closed, since that was the first time I've ever had to report someone. "Yes, I'm very grateful for the User who protected the page, thank the deity. And hopefully, it won't occur otherwise on other related articles. Thanks. Does user violate 3RR or is it unnecessary to pursue that, whether or not they were to register an account and continue behavior? That was my next concern." I just primarily wanted to ascertain that. If that unregistered user had been reverting continuously with newly spawned unregistered code names, or that one time a solid IP address that lasted for a brief chunk of time, could those all be connected and tied to the 3RR warning/block in some way for punishment, or was punishment not qualified from last night's excessive reverts? (At least 6, from their new account.) And if they were to register a username, that reverts to the same old habits, could those also be connected to that track record if they were to be reprimanded on the protected page?
If you want, I can copy and paste this all back on the discussion instead of your talk page. Sorry if I'm bothering you with all of these questions. Thanks in advance.-- Cinemaniac 86 Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire 18:16, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ed, could you possibly take at look at this CheckUser request I've made at SPI? I think all the pertinent links are there. As another editor has said, if this new account has outed themselves as a sock, they should be blocked. On the other hand, "even if it's not actually true, they're either trying to trick us into thinking they're an indefinitely blocked user or they actually are; in either case, probably WP:NOTHERE." This Sam.WikiKiwi sockmaster had 24 socks, including François-Ávila, the one who added the original section at issue in the Vikings article:
François-Ávila ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki).
Viking123456789 claims in his About the section "intermixing with the Slavs" post on the Vikings talk page to have written the content as a bad-faith hoax when he was "a teen in their angst".
Viking123456789 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
It's all a bit strange, whatever the case. Carlstak ( talk) 20:58, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
/* Original section title was: A concern */
I have just revert user:DilutedHereticX on the Justin I article. [5] This is not the first time I have reverted an edit of theirs. DilutedHereticX has been adding unsourced birth, death, years, or battle/siege dates, to numerous articles.
This is simply the tip of the iceberg.
I am not sure why they are clearly adding unsourced months, days, years, to articles. Can you help? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 21:00, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
![]() | |
Six years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:35, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Shakespeare_authorship_question#Motion:_Removal_of_Unused_Contentious_Topics,_Shakespeare_authorship_question_(October_2023) Tom Reedy ( talk) 01:41, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
You protected the page without delving deeper into the topic. Read the discussion(Talk page), you will find the explanation of these interventions. This is all very questionable. 2A02:B127:8F05:ABA8:BD99:FC74:1EB6:9AEA ( talk) 19:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
I posted a concern, back in July, over a group of editors that were adding anachronistic Armenian flags and adding Andranik Ozanian to infoboxes.
It appears one of them FedayiChristian has reappeared after a 3 month hiatus and readded Andranik Ozanian and Armenian flag to the Battle of Bulair article.
Another interesting tidbit, user:German Guy2784 who was blocked as a sock of Samuel Khuspov, made the same edits as FedayiChristian on Battle of Bulair. Not sure if this is sock-puppetry or meat-puppetry. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 00:41, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Hey, would it possible for you to lower the protection on Economy of Kolkata, the sockpuppetry that you referenced in your protection reason was circa 2021, it's been two years without any reports (I think) and doesn't really make sense have the article be indefinitely extended protected :) -- Sohom ( talk) 21:03, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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)
00:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi Ed, hope you're doing well. Having trouble with an editor calling himself Nottedeluce at the BLP Nicholas Hoult, who keeps reverting necessary copyedits of his last revision. English is not his native tongue, and he's introduced many blatant grammatical and style errors, such as redundancies and italicizing quotations. Another editor helpfully fixed the text, correcting the errors and fixing the badly written English, and was instantly reverted.
I started fixing his errors manually, and quickly realized that there were too many to make it worthwhile, so I restored the good version, only to see it instantly reverted. At this point, within a couple of hours he's reverted me twice, and the other editor once, leaving such edit summaries as his last: "My English is not correct. It is not my native language. For me it is a good article. DON'T DISREGARD THE WORK OF OTHERS!!" He's getting out of hand. I have left a notice at the article talk page. Carlstak ( talk) 22:00, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ed! In the last report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard you decided that the IP range appeared too wide to justify blocking, and told me to notify you if I notice any registered socks. However, this time I found the narrower IP range, 2600:6C44:117F:95BE:0:0:0:0/64 ( talk · contribs), which has been making controversial edits to grammar and wordings. This is very similar to Nguyentrongphu's editing style, which were mostly, if not all, unnecessary minor changes. See a more detailed report here. Given that their changes were unnecessary and controversial, has been occurring for a year now and I see no sign of other user in the narrower IP range this time, do you think a block is appropriate for this? Đại Việt quốc ( talk) 02:44, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ed, I think you told me to approach if you if I find any more possible sockpuppeting of User:HerbLightman. I think User:68.129.16.246 based on their edits of Euro and classic horror film articles. Same patterns of adding filmography notes and same "google a source" type of citations. Is there any further content I can provide to help with this? Andrzejbanas ( talk) 21:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
I had sent a Page Protection request on Zamorin page due to persistent disruptive edits from the same anonymous IP, thank you for protecting it. But the reported IP managed to sneak in a last minute edit, by removing sourced content added by other users and vandalizing it.
He did the same in the Samantan page too, but it was swiftly reverted and reported by other editors. Could you revert the page once to any of the previous edits by any of the other editors, before the IP vandalized it? Thank you again for the page protection! HölderlinRem1 ( talk) 04:47, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
The protection template was just removed from Awdal but a relative protection pp urgently needs to be added as the risk of edit warring from anonymous IP accounts and uder accounts are extremely high as has been going on for the past few months up until a temporary full restriction for edit warring expired last evening.
MustafaO ( talk) 11:44, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Onel5969 TT me 15:10, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy New Year! |
Hello EdJohnston: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary
blisters. |
Hello. Back on 30 January, based on a report at ANI, you blocked 2A02:842A:1BF:1901:0:0:0:0/64 for two-weeks due to disruptive editing, unsourced editing, unexplained content removal, and to encourage communication. The block expired on 13 February and the IP did not communicate and has resumed their disruptive editing. Would you reinstate the block for a longer duration? — Archer1234 ( t· c) 15:33, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
IPs geolocate back to LA.--
Kansas Bear (
talk)
17:52, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | Happy adminship anniversary! Hi EdJohnston! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 02:27, 20 February 2024 (UTC) |
![]() |
Hi @ EdJohnston - I'm sorry I did not notice the noticeboard pertaining discussion about Vanessa Bryant until it was closed. I've added to the discussion on her talk page about my thoughts on this though.
Have a nice day! Clear Looking Glass ( talk) 14:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello. The redirect page of Ununtrium to Nihonium is still protected, even though even the Nihonium page remains unprotected and there’s no reason for anyone to vandalize a random redirect page. Please unprotect it. CharlieEdited ( talk) 20:14, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
New users, and one I have mentioned before, have added Andranik Ozanian and the Armenian flag to articles in which Ozanian is not mentioned and during times when the Armenian flag doesn't exist.
With the battle of Sarikamish, page protection would be prudent, but with an editor like FedayiChristian waiting 5 months to make another inaccurate POV addition to an article, page protection is meaningless. FedayiChristian is of that same group you pinged over my previous concern.
The IPs which have targeted battle of Bulair have been addressed by Favonian by blocks. Since FedayiChristian chose not to respond to your talk page message back in October 2023, perhaps a indef block is warranted? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 16:31, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi, just to let you know 82.22.44.102 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is back to the same type of edits after the expiry of your block from this discussion at ANI. FozzieHey ( talk) 21:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Hey Ed. Thanks for blocking the sock of BWNH. I noticed you hadn't notified the sock that they had been blocked. Do you want me to leave them a talk page message on your behalf, or do you want me to leave it alone? Thanks again. NoobThreePointOh ( talk) 01:38, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you with this Ed. But user:HD86 has been engaging in disruptive editing along with a fair dose of personal attacks. Their only edits since 21 March 2024 have been to Aleppo, Aleppo talk page, and my talk page(after I posted a 3rr on their talk page). I also posted on their talk page that it appeared they had taken the information from the Ali Janbulad article, though I am not absolutely sure of that.
Ignore this concern Ed. Aintabli filed a report at
WP:ANI. --
Kansas Bear (
talk)
19:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
These comments belong at Talk:Sinhalese people. It is not up to admins to decide on content. And wanting to use the output of an AI tool in Wikipedia articles is unlikely to inspire confidence. EdJohnston ( talk) 14:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Singh et al's article was downloaded as PDF from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10514440/pdf/main.pdf And uploaded to chatpdf.com for AI to analyse and interpret the research findings. www.chatpdf.com is an AI Tool that can accurately scan the PDF document and highlight important points. This was its conclusion "1. The study analyzed the genetic data of Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils, revealing a close genetic affinity between the Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils, irrespective of their linguistic differences. 2. Genetic analysis indicated a significant genetic homogeneity between the Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils, likely due to long-term geographic proximity facilitating substantial gene flow. 3. The research identified traces of common genetic ancestry between the Sinhalese and the Maratha population, suggesting shared roots through fine-grained genetic analysis. 4. Despite linguistic distinctions, the genetic analysis of the Sinhalese population adds a significant chapter to the genetic landscape of South Asia. 5. The study highlighted the presence of excess sharing of smaller genetic segments between the Sinhalese and the Maratha, indicating a deeply rooted common genetic ancestry. 6. While the D statistics test showed non-significant results, the genetic data supported a closer genetic relationship between the Sinhalese and the Maratha population. 7. The genetic analysis of the Sinhalese population provides valuable insights into the population history of Sri Lanka, showcasing a unique genetic heritage. 8. The study emphasized the need for more ancient DNA research and Y chromosomal sequencing to determine migration timelines and further understand the genetic history of the Sinhalese. 9. The genetic homogeneity observed among the Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils challenges conventional notions of genetic differentiation based on linguistic affiliations in South Asia. 10. Overall, the research underscores the complex interplay of genetic, linguistic, and historical factors shaping the genetic landscape of the Sinhalese population in Sri Lanka.
Q. does this research indicate a higher gene flow to Sinhalese from northern India or southern India? AI's answer : - The research indicates a higher genetic affinity of the Sinhalese population with North Indian populations rather than South Indian populations. Genetic analysis of the Sinhalese suggests a closer relationship with North Indian populations, supporting the hypothesis of a North Indian origin for the Sri Lankan Sinhalese . Gabrielasirwatham ( talk) 06:49, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
|
Gtolrmy ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
User:Gtolrmy has made 5 edits. Aside from their edit on the Ptolemy article, every single edit on the Ptolemaic Kingdom article has removed references and referenced information. They hardly given any explanation in the edit summary. I'm not sure what can be done about this. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 00:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi Ed, hope you're doing well. Can you advise me of the proper place to bring the recurrent addition of unencyclopedic, unsourced, and misformatted text by students at College of the Holy Cross to the attention of someone who will rein these students in and teach them how to write encyclopedic content, find reliable sources for the information, and properly format it? I would think that if someone is supervising the students it would be the instructor and Wiki Ed staff shown at the course page for "Introduction to Classical Archaeology", but it seems those basics of Wikipedia editing are not being imparted to the students, judging by the low-grade content they have been adding to the Phoenicia article. Here's a sample of text added:
Even when one of the students actually cites sources, the text is badly written and the markup is misformatted. Thanks. Carlstak ( talk) 15:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Anna_Panagiotopoulou&oldid=1224190278 και oxi Anna Panagiotopoulou 2A02:587:CC0C:1000:A48C:7F4D:6CF8:410F ( talk) 10:52, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Admin statistics
Action Count
Edits 81145
Edits+Deleted 82834
Pages deleted 2347
Revisions deleted 27
Pages restored 79
Pages protected 4418
Pages unprotected 83
Protections modified 705
Users blocked 4926
Users reblocked 217
Users unblocked 116
User rights modified 28
Users created 46
Would you be able to look at the current discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hellenized Middle East? It appears, at least to me, that user:Aearthrise is bludgeoning the process. Thanks -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 12:52, 31 May 2024 (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 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | Archive 53 |
I have seen you active on this at the talk page HistoryofIran and I am having a long standing issue at the YPG which Turkey sees as terrorist but their NATO allies nor the EU not etc. I suggest an ECP for the People's Defense Units, where an IP wants the POV template at the top of the article seemingly for not having included that the EU, USA, Australia etc. classify the YPG as terrorist as you can see from this discussion downwards. They were invited to provide sources for such an inclusion, but my patience has its limits which comes when there is a remedy like ARBECR. The word terrorist gets included every now and then anyway by some other IP... Talk page access should not be removed if possible as maybe someone has new insights worth their inclusion. Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 12:17, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
A long time ago, I did something (don't ask me what it was because I haven't been able to figure it out now) that changed the way contribution histories look. If there are consecutive edits by the same user, instead of showing each entry, it collapses them and shows the number of consecutive edits in brackets to the left, e.g., [3]. If you click on Prev, it shows the changes made by all 3 edits, and if you wish to revert all 3 by clicking on Vandalism, you can. This last part works only if the consecutive edits are the latest edits on the page. If you wish to uncollapse them so that you see all 3 entries, you click on the bracketed number.
In the last few days, although it shows everything normally, I cannot revert all 3 edits after I click on Prev. I can still click on the normal Rollback but then I can't automatically warn the user for vandalism.
I vaguely recollect that you showed me this "feature" years ago to help me out when patrolling WP:AN3, and I was hoping you could help. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 17:21, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Multiple "new users" have attempted to change referenced information in the Etruscan civilization article, from 4 haplotypes to nine/ten haplotypes.
This has been sporadic enough to avoid page protect. Not sure what can be done, but I felt an Admin should be made aware of this. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 01:54, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ed, I hope all is well with you. We've been having trouble with a single purpose account user (an appropriate double-meaning), Calvin Bryant, Florida, whose sole purpose in editing WP is to add his artwork to articles for self promotion. Here are his global contributions, which doesn't include all of them. As you can see, this has been going on since May 2019. He's been asked repeatedly to stop, but he's very persistent in re-adding them when they're reverted. This is getting really tiresome. Carlstak ( talk) 03:58, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Hey, I have a request. I don't know if you've noticed but Butwhatdoiknow has been making - or attempting to make - changes to WP:EW. They have to do with one section of the policy. If you look at the revision history, you'll see what changes have actually been made and the latest change they want to make, which I reverted. They want to discuss the issue, even though, in my view, I've already discussed it, and I didn't enjoy the earlier discussions at all. Anyway, AFAIK, no administrator other than me has participated in the discussions. I'd appreciate it if you'd tell me what you think, at least of the latest change. Don't worry. I won't be a bit offended if you disagree with me. I just need another opinion of someone who knows the policy and enforces it. Thanks.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 01:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
I'm not sure why this discussion is taking place here but if that is how Bbb23 wants to proceed then I'm okay with it for now. Currently in dispute is not about "changes," but one particular change. Here's the history related to that particular change:
So here's my question for EdJohnston: In your opinion, does my edit worsen the flow, not affect the flow, or improve the flow? If you wish, feel free to reply at Wikipedia talk:Edit warring#Flow. - Butwhatdoiknow ( talk) 06:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello. Hope you're doing well. I was wondering if you could change the target at Noor Pahlavi because it's currently redirected to Reza Pahlavi, Crown Prince of Iran#Noor Pahlavi, but no such section exists within her father's article. I think the more appropriate target would be Reza Pahlavi, Crown Prince of Iran#Relationships and marriage, which is where the page on her sister Iman Pahlavi redirects to. I would have done this myself but since you have fully protected the page it's impossible for me to modify it. Thanks. Keivan.f Talk 21:27, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
I see that your warning at User talk:Chitral view#Please respond and explain why you should not be blocked hasn't stopped that incorrigible hijacker. - David Biddulph ( talk) 18:04, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Per this discussion, can Battle of Capakhchur be deleted? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 13:50, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | Happy adminship anniversary! Hi EdJohnston! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:34, 20 February 2023 (UTC) |
![]() |
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Dom Aleixo (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a disambiguation page which either
Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. BilledMammal ( talk) 22:37, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ed. I believe at one point you talked to me to come talk to you again if I could find more founding of an IP abusing several accounts to avoid bans via adding unsourced content and somewhat. (From years ago:[ here)
So far I have found they have since been editing under the IP, but as well as several accounts including User:68.129.15.71, User:Akmadomad, User:BigBoyWilliams, User:HerbLightman, User:EuroHorrorGuy, and User:FrankensteinsDad. Here are some quick previous blocks here and here. The user removes material that declared uneeded here (against WP:FILMRELEASE), and have responded to unsourced content or usage of multiple account stating it was a quick mistake or they would find the sources later, then removing any comments on their talk page involving warnings or questions here, here, here, and here.
I know in the past you asked for a smoking gun related to this incident, and I believe outside their very similar talk pages, favored articles (older genre films and their actors), the biggest smoking gun is one of these users removing the warnings from another users article. Here is HerbLightman removing warning tags about being blocked from EuroHorrorGuy's articles. here, here, here and several others in late February 2022.
The user has been active on the site for years and my experience is they have found several loopholes to avoid being block or banned, but have no found a way to contribute to Wikipedia in a consistent constructive manner and has taken to SockPuppetry to avoid general simple bans. How should I approach this? Andrzejbanas ( talk) 07:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello EdJohnston,
I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Artwork for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.
If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.
You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
BoyTheKingCanDance ( talk) 04:19, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
At Taiwan thats vandalism by two socks of the same master not an edit war between nationalists. Note that you've locked it on a version that goes against one of the strongest consensuses I know of. Horse Eye's Back ( talk) 03:58, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Hey, Ed. Hope you're well. If you've got some free time, could you check a new SPI I filed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Virgiliosarvanitis. It involves the possible application of a range block.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 18:30, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Hey Ed,
The Tarawih page is having an edit war, where the minority sect of Muslims are editing the page to satisfy their sect. They keep including information that is slandering the page and not keeping its integrity. This is a usual thing during the month of Ramadan. Could you please protect the page to not allow any user to edit the page? We would greatly appreciate it. Thank you! Inaquout ( talk) 18:21, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi, as you are the one who has protected the page, could you make this suggested edit? VSL ( talk) 20:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Is there anything concerning the honorifics over Popes, perhaps similiar to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Islam-related_articles#Islamic_honorifics? I have noticed numerous additions to papal articles with the addition of "His Holiness" in the infobox. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 20:53, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi again, the user "Old houses" continues to edit war despite your block earlier on. They are at three reverts in 24 hours again. I am not engaging them any further on this. I have repeatedly insisted on consensus and talking things out more, and was given personal attacks, more reverts, and threats to create multiple accounts in reply ( 1, 2). ɱ (talk) 05:13, 5 April 2023 (UTC) Edit - and a discussion about difficulties with the user's conduct has continued here. ɱ (talk) 14:24, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
User:Alihd23 has been, since around 20 March, essentially spamming the ethnicity "Persian" into individuals' articles. Some of these article do have ethnicity in the body of the article, but numerous edits have been WP:UNDUE(with multiple ethnicities presented in the body of the articles) or simple additions to the Lead with no source(s) to support "Persian". Is there anything that can be done?
A listing:
User:Alihd23 posted on my talk page asking why I was removing "Persian" to which I informed them of MOS:Ethnicity. Clearly they do not care and resumed adding "Persian" indiscriminately. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 23:25, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
It appears the discussion between Beshogur and Volgabulgaria has reached the realm of personal attacks.
Volgabulgari doubles down with an WP:Aspersion that Beshogur blocked "my"? and "my friend's account"(Karak1l1c). I had considered posting a NPA warning on Volgabulgari's talk page, but considering their latest comment towards Beshogur "blocking" them and their friend I felt it would simply exacerbate the situation.
Your thoughts? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 16:55, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
On second thought, you may want to read the entire discussion. Beshogur may have just proved Volgabulgari is meatpuppeting. --
Kansas Bear (
talk)
17:00, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you're the admin who protected People's Anti-Fascist Front - could you add an NPOV dispute tag to the article? There's a dispute over some newly added content, such as the WP:TERRORIST/ WP:NPOV violation in the very first sentence of the article. Solblaze ( talk) 06:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ed, hope you're doing well. The perennial nuisance and recurrent pain the Mosquito guy is back with a new sock puppet, ActiveWindows: same articles, same changes, same bad English in edit summaries. Carlstak ( talk) 19:17, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
You and Kansas Bear have gone on and removed Persian from many actual Persian figures for no reason other than MOS:Ethnicity, which makes no sense.
You haven't removed Greek from Socrates, so why this double standard? Rumi and Ibn-Sina are ethnically Persian, and worked in Persian. MOS:Ethnicity has no merit here, as their heritage is very relevant to the figures in question. Even Britannica lists Ibn-Sina as a Persian, and is explained in detail by User:alidoostzadeh. Rumi's page has discussed this thoroughly already. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FEA8:55DF:FC8A:8C6D:42C2:1616:4D24 ( talk) 02:21, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
Hey, could you please lock this article: Levantine cuisine, so that only 500/30 editors can edit it? Supreme Deliciousness ( talk) 06:11, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Good afternoon @ EdJohnston. I'd seen you've protected Elizabetta Gonzaga's article due to vandalism by 176.200.142.92 and 151.57.174.55. I would like to inform you that both IPs are in fact the LTA abuser Livioandronico2013, who had uploaded with multiple sockpuppets a lot of photographs of famous paintings, sculptures and buildings from Italy and, sometimes, from other parts of the world. Now, recently, they're vandalizing Guidobaldo da Montefeltro –via another IP– for impose its version among other good faith contributions by other users. I'd just reverted him to stable varsion, but he's maybe going to undid me in a near future, like he did with Elizabetta Gonzaga. Could you please protect the article to avoid vandalism by this LTA and, if he continues reverting me, restoring the stable version before his changes, and also restore Elizabetta Gonzaga to this stable version? Thank you in advance for your help and sorry for the inconvenience. Best regards. 81.41.175.237 ( talk) 11:17, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
I wanted to ask your opinion on this one. You blocked them (quite correctly) in 2020, after a pattern of disruption. They've been contributing to Wiktionary since then, apparently without any major issues (they had some self-requested blocks there, but none for cause since 2020), and are willing to agree to a set of conditions I think do address the ways in which they behave disruptively. Given that, would you object to a "last chance" unblock for them, subject of course to those conditions? Seraphimblade Talk to me 18:56, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | Happy First Edit Day! Hi EdJohnston! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of the day you made your first edit and became a Wikipedian! CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:40, 29 May 2023 (UTC) |
![]() |
I am trying to update the GDP of Dhaka city. The original data was created by me but those links are now broken. I see the protection is because of possible "nationalist" motives. I can assure you that I have no such motives. I just sit on the relevant data, scientifically developed, and would like to update the entry. Stakacan ( talk) 20:54, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Greetings. Long time. There's a situation at this IP user page. What's happening is, the same person behind multiple IP accounts keep attacking that user. Now I remember a situation like this several years ago that an anonymous individual was tripping up his cord to change IP addresses just to vandalize at the Sony Pictures article and other pages just to have his way. When you get a chance, please look into this. Thanks. King Shadeed ( talk) 14:04, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
That's not me. I don't know how the check user procedure working but clearly it is false in this case. Blubluman was my sockpuppet and every account in my sockpuppet archives belong to me excluding Historyofarmenia01. But any of these new accounts doesn't belong to me. @ EdJohnston: Is there any chance to prove this? Also why I would take same name for sockpuppetry? It doesn't make any sense. 95.70.246.173 ( talk) 19:02, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
Vizualnoiise ( talk · contribs) has, since 15 April 2023, been removing the mention of Jat ethnicity(referenced by reliable sources) from the Abu Hanifa article.
They have numerous warnings on their talk page, to which I have added a {{3rr}}. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 20:54, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi, Ed. There's an unblock request at UTRS from an editor using the IP address 2600:4040:2929:fb00:642e:8232:70fc:1f68, relating to a block you placed on the /38 range. I am currently editing on my phone, which makes doing a lot of checking fiddly and awkward, so I am much less confident than I would otherwise be, but it looks to me as though blocking 2600:4040:2800::/40 might be enough. Can you have a look, and see what you think? JBW ( talk) 20:53, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
2600:4040:2929:FB00:642E:8232:70FC:1F68 is Verizon Business and the full range would be /24. You can read the complaint that lead to the block
here. Previous attempts to resolve the problem failed. A quick look at the report shows the IP addresses in question this time around are
2600:4040:2836:6200:da5c:97de:5be5:4634 and
2600:4040:2836:6200:42c9:2e2d:7e11:7961 and
2600:4040:282c:ec00:dc18:ba4d:7902:d3a. The smallest range that would capture those addresses would be (calculating calculating calculating)2600:4040:2800:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000/39, only slightly smaller than the blocked range. Now, the report implies these IP addresses were used by the same person. Checkuser data strongly implies the addresses in 2600:4040:2836:6200::/64 are a match; I can't make the same claim about the other addresses. I'm not saying they aren't, though. There's at least one sockpuppeteer operating from this range; privacy requirements prohibit me from identifying them, but they aren't one of the really bad LTA's. A fair number of constructive editors. This person is almost certainly behind other attempts to edit
List of programs broadcast by The CW and
List of Amazon Freevee original programming and
List of Peacock original programming and a few similar articles; I found many attempts across many IP addresses that are
Highly likely to be the same person. I initially hoped semi-protection on a few articles would be sufficient, but it just wouldn't have stopped this user. I believe this user does not have an account (at least, not one that's been active recently).
I see them stable on /64 ranges and then hop to a new one. At the moment, an anon-only block on 2600:4040:2800:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000/42 would catch the ones I'm fairly certain about. I have no reason to believe they are actually confined within that space, though, particularly as checkuser data doesn't go back all that far. A range larger than /64 should be anon-only (as this is). We could play whack-a-mole with /64 blocks but this would only slow them down a little, so a larger range is called for. My gut says a /42 block won't work, it's too narrow. On the other hand, I see no compelling reason to expand the range beyond /38; checkuser logs imply they were targeting other users there.
In summary: /38 is not unreasonable, if anon-only. A smaller /42 range could be tried but my experience shows that wouldn't work. Rapid-response /64 blocks could work but would only be minor speed-bumps. Page protection isn't going to be enough (but could be used in combination). This isn't a specific LTA or at least, not one active via their account recently.
Within the privacy restrictions imposed on me, I'm happy to answer follow-up questions. This was a lot of data to page through and not easy to summarise. -- Yamla ( talk) 20:37, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
Well, thanks to all of you (Ed, Yamla, and Ponyo) for following this up. As I indicated in my original post, I was not by any means confident that my initial impression was right, and it looks as though it definitely wasn't. JBW ( talk) 22:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Ed, I mentioned you at WP:ANI#Martdj, Martin Kulldorff, and odd crusade.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 13:40, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
@Md Sunnat Ali Mollik The account is locked globally. How to get rid of global lock need your help Please suggest what can I do. 45.250.228.45 ( talk) 06:42, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
The redirect
Ástor Piazzolla has been listed at
redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the
redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 13 § Ástor Piazzolla until a consensus is reached.
Bgsu98
(Talk)
20:05, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Ed, I stumbled across these two articles( Battle of Bulair & Battle of Kardzhali that mentioned a Andranik Ozanian in their infoboxes, and who does not appear to be mentioned in either article.
Andranik Ozanian appeared in both infoboxes, initially, with a Bulgarian flag next to his name. Certain editors then took it upon themselves to change said flag to the flag of Armenia, blatantly ignoring the fact that Armenia did not exist as a nation state in 1913(battle of Bulair) or 1912(battle of Kardzhali). Maybe these editors should read First Republic of Armenia?
Not sure if these editors are one and the same, a coordinated effort, or just coincidence. I have refrained from posting warnings since I have no idea what warning(s) to post on their talk pages. Sorry to have such a convoluted issue, but maybe some fresh eyes can see this better than me. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 17:10, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi Edj, Hope you're doing well. Please address this request once. Fade258 ( talk) 16:12, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
I wasn't sure if I was allowed to continue the conversation on there once it was closed, since that was the first time I've ever had to report someone. "Yes, I'm very grateful for the User who protected the page, thank the deity. And hopefully, it won't occur otherwise on other related articles. Thanks. Does user violate 3RR or is it unnecessary to pursue that, whether or not they were to register an account and continue behavior? That was my next concern." I just primarily wanted to ascertain that. If that unregistered user had been reverting continuously with newly spawned unregistered code names, or that one time a solid IP address that lasted for a brief chunk of time, could those all be connected and tied to the 3RR warning/block in some way for punishment, or was punishment not qualified from last night's excessive reverts? (At least 6, from their new account.) And if they were to register a username, that reverts to the same old habits, could those also be connected to that track record if they were to be reprimanded on the protected page?
If you want, I can copy and paste this all back on the discussion instead of your talk page. Sorry if I'm bothering you with all of these questions. Thanks in advance.-- Cinemaniac 86 Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire 18:16, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ed, could you possibly take at look at this CheckUser request I've made at SPI? I think all the pertinent links are there. As another editor has said, if this new account has outed themselves as a sock, they should be blocked. On the other hand, "even if it's not actually true, they're either trying to trick us into thinking they're an indefinitely blocked user or they actually are; in either case, probably WP:NOTHERE." This Sam.WikiKiwi sockmaster had 24 socks, including François-Ávila, the one who added the original section at issue in the Vikings article:
François-Ávila ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki).
Viking123456789 claims in his About the section "intermixing with the Slavs" post on the Vikings talk page to have written the content as a bad-faith hoax when he was "a teen in their angst".
Viking123456789 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
It's all a bit strange, whatever the case. Carlstak ( talk) 20:58, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
/* Original section title was: A concern */
I have just revert user:DilutedHereticX on the Justin I article. [5] This is not the first time I have reverted an edit of theirs. DilutedHereticX has been adding unsourced birth, death, years, or battle/siege dates, to numerous articles.
This is simply the tip of the iceberg.
I am not sure why they are clearly adding unsourced months, days, years, to articles. Can you help? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 21:00, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
![]() | |
Six years! |
---|
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:35, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
/info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Shakespeare_authorship_question#Motion:_Removal_of_Unused_Contentious_Topics,_Shakespeare_authorship_question_(October_2023) Tom Reedy ( talk) 01:41, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
You protected the page without delving deeper into the topic. Read the discussion(Talk page), you will find the explanation of these interventions. This is all very questionable. 2A02:B127:8F05:ABA8:BD99:FC74:1EB6:9AEA ( talk) 19:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
I posted a concern, back in July, over a group of editors that were adding anachronistic Armenian flags and adding Andranik Ozanian to infoboxes.
It appears one of them FedayiChristian has reappeared after a 3 month hiatus and readded Andranik Ozanian and Armenian flag to the Battle of Bulair article.
Another interesting tidbit, user:German Guy2784 who was blocked as a sock of Samuel Khuspov, made the same edits as FedayiChristian on Battle of Bulair. Not sure if this is sock-puppetry or meat-puppetry. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 00:41, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
Hey, would it possible for you to lower the protection on Economy of Kolkata, the sockpuppetry that you referenced in your protection reason was circa 2021, it's been two years without any reports (I think) and doesn't really make sense have the article be indefinitely extended protected :) -- Sohom ( talk) 21:03, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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)
00:29, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi Ed, hope you're doing well. Having trouble with an editor calling himself Nottedeluce at the BLP Nicholas Hoult, who keeps reverting necessary copyedits of his last revision. English is not his native tongue, and he's introduced many blatant grammatical and style errors, such as redundancies and italicizing quotations. Another editor helpfully fixed the text, correcting the errors and fixing the badly written English, and was instantly reverted.
I started fixing his errors manually, and quickly realized that there were too many to make it worthwhile, so I restored the good version, only to see it instantly reverted. At this point, within a couple of hours he's reverted me twice, and the other editor once, leaving such edit summaries as his last: "My English is not correct. It is not my native language. For me it is a good article. DON'T DISREGARD THE WORK OF OTHERS!!" He's getting out of hand. I have left a notice at the article talk page. Carlstak ( talk) 22:00, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ed! In the last report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard you decided that the IP range appeared too wide to justify blocking, and told me to notify you if I notice any registered socks. However, this time I found the narrower IP range, 2600:6C44:117F:95BE:0:0:0:0/64 ( talk · contribs), which has been making controversial edits to grammar and wordings. This is very similar to Nguyentrongphu's editing style, which were mostly, if not all, unnecessary minor changes. See a more detailed report here. Given that their changes were unnecessary and controversial, has been occurring for a year now and I see no sign of other user in the narrower IP range this time, do you think a block is appropriate for this? Đại Việt quốc ( talk) 02:44, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ed, I think you told me to approach if you if I find any more possible sockpuppeting of User:HerbLightman. I think User:68.129.16.246 based on their edits of Euro and classic horror film articles. Same patterns of adding filmography notes and same "google a source" type of citations. Is there any further content I can provide to help with this? Andrzejbanas ( talk) 21:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
I had sent a Page Protection request on Zamorin page due to persistent disruptive edits from the same anonymous IP, thank you for protecting it. But the reported IP managed to sneak in a last minute edit, by removing sourced content added by other users and vandalizing it.
He did the same in the Samantan page too, but it was swiftly reverted and reported by other editors. Could you revert the page once to any of the previous edits by any of the other editors, before the IP vandalized it? Thank you again for the page protection! HölderlinRem1 ( talk) 04:47, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
The protection template was just removed from Awdal but a relative protection pp urgently needs to be added as the risk of edit warring from anonymous IP accounts and uder accounts are extremely high as has been going on for the past few months up until a temporary full restriction for edit warring expired last evening.
MustafaO ( talk) 11:44, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Onel5969 TT me 15:10, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy New Year! |
Hello EdJohnston: Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unnecessary
blisters. |
Hello. Back on 30 January, based on a report at ANI, you blocked 2A02:842A:1BF:1901:0:0:0:0/64 for two-weeks due to disruptive editing, unsourced editing, unexplained content removal, and to encourage communication. The block expired on 13 February and the IP did not communicate and has resumed their disruptive editing. Would you reinstate the block for a longer duration? — Archer1234 ( t· c) 15:33, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
IPs geolocate back to LA.--
Kansas Bear (
talk)
17:52, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | Happy adminship anniversary! Hi EdJohnston! On behalf of the Birthday Committee, I'd like to wish you a very happy anniversary of your successful request for adminship. Enjoy this special day! The Herald (Benison) ( talk) 02:27, 20 February 2024 (UTC) |
![]() |
Hi @ EdJohnston - I'm sorry I did not notice the noticeboard pertaining discussion about Vanessa Bryant until it was closed. I've added to the discussion on her talk page about my thoughts on this though.
Have a nice day! Clear Looking Glass ( talk) 14:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello. The redirect page of Ununtrium to Nihonium is still protected, even though even the Nihonium page remains unprotected and there’s no reason for anyone to vandalize a random redirect page. Please unprotect it. CharlieEdited ( talk) 20:14, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
New users, and one I have mentioned before, have added Andranik Ozanian and the Armenian flag to articles in which Ozanian is not mentioned and during times when the Armenian flag doesn't exist.
With the battle of Sarikamish, page protection would be prudent, but with an editor like FedayiChristian waiting 5 months to make another inaccurate POV addition to an article, page protection is meaningless. FedayiChristian is of that same group you pinged over my previous concern.
The IPs which have targeted battle of Bulair have been addressed by Favonian by blocks. Since FedayiChristian chose not to respond to your talk page message back in October 2023, perhaps a indef block is warranted? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 16:31, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Hi, just to let you know 82.22.44.102 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is back to the same type of edits after the expiry of your block from this discussion at ANI. FozzieHey ( talk) 21:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Hey Ed. Thanks for blocking the sock of BWNH. I noticed you hadn't notified the sock that they had been blocked. Do you want me to leave them a talk page message on your behalf, or do you want me to leave it alone? Thanks again. NoobThreePointOh ( talk) 01:38, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you with this Ed. But user:HD86 has been engaging in disruptive editing along with a fair dose of personal attacks. Their only edits since 21 March 2024 have been to Aleppo, Aleppo talk page, and my talk page(after I posted a 3rr on their talk page). I also posted on their talk page that it appeared they had taken the information from the Ali Janbulad article, though I am not absolutely sure of that.
Ignore this concern Ed. Aintabli filed a report at
WP:ANI. --
Kansas Bear (
talk)
19:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
These comments belong at Talk:Sinhalese people. It is not up to admins to decide on content. And wanting to use the output of an AI tool in Wikipedia articles is unlikely to inspire confidence. EdJohnston ( talk) 14:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Singh et al's article was downloaded as PDF from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10514440/pdf/main.pdf And uploaded to chatpdf.com for AI to analyse and interpret the research findings. www.chatpdf.com is an AI Tool that can accurately scan the PDF document and highlight important points. This was its conclusion "1. The study analyzed the genetic data of Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils, revealing a close genetic affinity between the Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils, irrespective of their linguistic differences. 2. Genetic analysis indicated a significant genetic homogeneity between the Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils, likely due to long-term geographic proximity facilitating substantial gene flow. 3. The research identified traces of common genetic ancestry between the Sinhalese and the Maratha population, suggesting shared roots through fine-grained genetic analysis. 4. Despite linguistic distinctions, the genetic analysis of the Sinhalese population adds a significant chapter to the genetic landscape of South Asia. 5. The study highlighted the presence of excess sharing of smaller genetic segments between the Sinhalese and the Maratha, indicating a deeply rooted common genetic ancestry. 6. While the D statistics test showed non-significant results, the genetic data supported a closer genetic relationship between the Sinhalese and the Maratha population. 7. The genetic analysis of the Sinhalese population provides valuable insights into the population history of Sri Lanka, showcasing a unique genetic heritage. 8. The study emphasized the need for more ancient DNA research and Y chromosomal sequencing to determine migration timelines and further understand the genetic history of the Sinhalese. 9. The genetic homogeneity observed among the Sinhalese and Sri Lankan Tamils challenges conventional notions of genetic differentiation based on linguistic affiliations in South Asia. 10. Overall, the research underscores the complex interplay of genetic, linguistic, and historical factors shaping the genetic landscape of the Sinhalese population in Sri Lanka.
Q. does this research indicate a higher gene flow to Sinhalese from northern India or southern India? AI's answer : - The research indicates a higher genetic affinity of the Sinhalese population with North Indian populations rather than South Indian populations. Genetic analysis of the Sinhalese suggests a closer relationship with North Indian populations, supporting the hypothesis of a North Indian origin for the Sri Lankan Sinhalese . Gabrielasirwatham ( talk) 06:49, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
|
Gtolrmy ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
User:Gtolrmy has made 5 edits. Aside from their edit on the Ptolemy article, every single edit on the Ptolemaic Kingdom article has removed references and referenced information. They hardly given any explanation in the edit summary. I'm not sure what can be done about this. -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 00:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Hi Ed, hope you're doing well. Can you advise me of the proper place to bring the recurrent addition of unencyclopedic, unsourced, and misformatted text by students at College of the Holy Cross to the attention of someone who will rein these students in and teach them how to write encyclopedic content, find reliable sources for the information, and properly format it? I would think that if someone is supervising the students it would be the instructor and Wiki Ed staff shown at the course page for "Introduction to Classical Archaeology", but it seems those basics of Wikipedia editing are not being imparted to the students, judging by the low-grade content they have been adding to the Phoenicia article. Here's a sample of text added:
Even when one of the students actually cites sources, the text is badly written and the markup is misformatted. Thanks. Carlstak ( talk) 15:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Anna_Panagiotopoulou&oldid=1224190278 και oxi Anna Panagiotopoulou 2A02:587:CC0C:1000:A48C:7F4D:6CF8:410F ( talk) 10:52, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Admin statistics
Action Count
Edits 81145
Edits+Deleted 82834
Pages deleted 2347
Revisions deleted 27
Pages restored 79
Pages protected 4418
Pages unprotected 83
Protections modified 705
Users blocked 4926
Users reblocked 217
Users unblocked 116
User rights modified 28
Users created 46
Would you be able to look at the current discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hellenized Middle East? It appears, at least to me, that user:Aearthrise is bludgeoning the process. Thanks -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 12:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)