Dear El C,
Thank you for participating in the recent
discretionary sanctions community consultation. We are truly appreciative of the range of feedback we received and the high quality discussion which occurred during the process. We have now posted a
summary of the feedback we've received and also a preview of some of what we expect to happen next. We hope that the second phase, a presentation of draft recommendations, will proceed on time in June or early July. You will be notified when this phase begins, unless you choose to to opt-out of future mailings by removing your name
here.
--
Barkeep49 &
KevinL (aka L235)
21:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C - noticed you hadn't been around for a while. Hope all's well and you're just taking a break - God knows you deserve it. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 17:58, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I was tagged here, I wondered if responding to these accusations that weren't made in any good faith whatsoever would be a violation of the topic ban. I think it would, but I wanted to make sure. In this case, should I not respond at all? I took into account that you were the enforcer on topic ban, and I thought it would be best to ask this to you. --► Sincerely: Sola virum 07:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
For Stolperstein and History of the Jews in Dęblin and Irena during World War II, both have seen recent activity from likely socks. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:48, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The thread is at
WP:AN#Review_of_30/500_protection Thanks
Girth Summit
(blether)
12:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Given your previous involvement in imposing some discretionary sanctions in this area, I felt only natural that I should also inform you of an open ArbCom case request. Thanks, RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 01:51, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hope to be back (in some capacity, at least) sometime next week. Thanks, everyone, for your collective patience. In the meantime, Songspam, per usual. El_C 00:19, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I've just seen I've been mentionned multiple times in discussions and I think I'm detached enough now so that I'll be fine to answer by myself on the subject. I must admit I wrote once last week or so because I wanted to make a point to another editor I used to engage with back in february. I forgot about the voluntary stuff tbh. But if you'd accept to remove my voluntary sanction i'd appreciate it. Thank you very much for your help back in february, you didn't "mishandle" anything. You helped me make it end when I was in my (let's say more intense) phase and wasn't really liking how I was being treated as a conspiracy theorist. Feynstein ( talk) 14:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Dear @ El C:, could you please have a look at the tone of user Alalch Emis in /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Zangezur_corridor AfD and advise whether that behaviour is within the Wikipedia standards for editors' interaction? The person appears to have zero knowledge in the topic yet hard convictions based on cold-searching Google, and got agitated because I pointed out that he should not WP:OR in already highly controversial subject and suggested to self-revert then discuss his additions. If he kept it limited to tendentious editing and commented only on my actions I would somehow tolerate that, but after I pointed out that targeting the editor's personality like "you're boring" and repeatedly using inflammatory language like "you're wasting your time" and "you can keep spinning it whichever way you like" is not acceptable, he showed no insight. From his talk page /info/en/?search=User:Alalch_Emis I can see he had similar problems with another article which you closed the case of. What's the right course of action, please? TIA! --Armatura ( talk) 17:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Delete. Dear colleagues, I strongly remind that Wikipedia is not a place for political influence. Zangezur corridor doesn't exist, so this provocative article should be deleted( diff). Why has their !vote gone unchallenged, but the ones by the SPAs !voting keep have? So, I really dislike this type of imbalance, which I find erodes the project's credibility. Anyway, while it's expected for a contentious deletion discussion to ebb and flow, I'm seeing a lot of ebbing, but not much flow. Maybe take a step back from the discussion so as to calm the waters a bit...? HTH! El_C 21:20, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
As you were the admin that applied the semi-protect to Talk:COVID-19 misinformation, what would be your thoughts on applying the same to Talk:Investigations into the origin of COVID-19? The talk page has, particularly recently, gotten significantly more IP-based cruft. Particularly with low quality accusations, sometimes indicating the article was not read by the user. An additional sampling from the last week:
Naturally, all of this is disruptive, and a drain on editor time to address. Would you consider protection of this talk page as falling under WP:GS/COVID19 for the same reason as the misinformation talk page protection, or is there a noticeboard you'd suggest taking this to? Thank you. Bakkster Man ( talk) 13:23, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
The local description page of the POTD image is cascade protected, so there is no need to protect it. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello - after you handled the vandalism of trans BLPs I reported yesterday (thank you for this), two other IPs in the same subnet (147.161) that vandalized those pages vandalized the pages of two other trans women, Tifanny Abreu and Alexandra Grey. I don't know how to file a request for a rangeblock or whatever it's called, but am hoping you or another admin can help. Funcrunch ( talk) 02:23, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi EI C,
This IP you blocked is back with vengeance :( OyMosby ( talk) 15:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for protecting List of Jeopardy! contestants. However, the talk page is still being spammed. Could you also protect Talk:List of Jeopardy! contestants? Thanks. AldezD ( talk) 20:14, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey El C, did you find what you needed? I'm new to the GS area too and am desperately hoping I haven't botched this all too much :-) All best, Go Phightins ! 16:33, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Re your edit summary asking why I linked Radio Free Asia Article and GS/UYGHUR, this is because the current bout of activity on Radio Free Asia began following news about the arrest of RFA journalists reporting in Xinjiang. (The disruption was first brought up at AN/I here.) GS/UYGHUR has been set up as "broadly construed", and given the situation the Radio Free Asia article falls under that broad framework. More specifically, the article also has a "Arrests of Uyghur journalists' relatives" section, which is directly within the topic area. CMD ( talk) 16:53, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
If there is confusion about which content is considered related, the content in question may be marked in the wiki source with an invisible comment.) and comment the subsection. Of course, I will say that as I am involved, I am biased, so I will not go around attempting to challenge your decision.
As for the example of the Gaza media building bombing over at the AP article: ARBPIA "related content" could be invoked for it if there was a dispute concerning that bombing incident (and anything related), but the prevailing practice is not to impose these sort of sanctions preemptively.This makes sense, thanks for explaining. CPCEnjoyer ( talk) 19:38, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
This, because the sensitivity of the subject matter is off the charts.Agreed, though I am not sure how 30/500 will fix it, other than allow two editors, who were previously punished for off-wiki coordination, remove sourced content from the article and stonewall it by not discussing on the talk page. CPCEnjoyer ( talk) 11:50, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
CPCEnjoyer, a couple of things. First, no accusing other editors of hounding or off-wiki coordination without evidence in the form of diffs, please. Not on my talk page, not anywhere. That counts as an WP:ASPERSION. At any event, if that is something you wish to pursue further, you should take it to the relevant noticeboard/project page. But as someone whose 2nd edit was to revert the Radio Free Asia page ( April 10 diff), my sense is that you may be risking a WP:BOOMERANG there. Up to you, though. Regardless, I'd stress that this isn't something I wish to engage, here, on my talk page. Also, toolforge'ing CMD (which I just noticed) in a manner that comes across as too terse to be useful — that is also increasingly giving me WP:DISRUPTSIGNS vibe. Overall, I'm not sure there's further utility to continuing this conversation thread on my talk page at this time. El_C 14:55, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
I fondly remember fondly our previous interactions and am glad to cross paths with you again, even if under somewhat unfortunate circumstances. I just reverted an edit I judged to be vandalism by User:213.175.190.165. It looks like they have a history of vandalism and that you've previously warned you. What should I do in this type of circumstance? Should I alert the involved admin, like I'm doing now, or should I try to handle the situation myself in some way? Be well and stay safe, Benevolent human ( talk) 18:55, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C, since you've been a peacemaker in January / February, I thought I'd bother you again. 2021 storming of the United States Capitol has recently been moved to 2021 United States Capitol attack, but a lot of people (myself included) believe there was no consensus. The move review is still open, but now someone started a new RfC... It looks like we're moving into the same mess we had four or five months ago. As far as I can tell, some of the involved editors are relatively new to Wikipedia, and many of those participating now were not involved in the RMs back then. I think it would be good if an experienced admin could keep an eye on it. If you don't have the time or energy, that's OK. In that case, you could point me to someone/somewhere else I could post a note like this? (I hope this doesn't look like I want to stifle or control the process. I don't. I just wouldn't like to see it devolve into a non-process again.) — Chrisahn ( talk) 19:17, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Could you please close and determine consensus for the discussion at WPTC? There are some additional related comments here. Noah Talk 22:53, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
See [7], [8] and [9]. I guess these articles might get mnre attention now. Doug Weller talk 18:42, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Dear @ El C, hope you're doing well. I wanted to hear an additional opinion and thought about asking it here if you don't mind. I had a long discussion in the Zangezur corridor talk page whether these addition are appropriate or ought to included after every Aliev land claim over Armenia [1] [2] [3]. All the arguments are presented in the discussion, if you can, please take a look. I want another third opinion, and I thought since you were involved with AA topics and that you have alot of experience, asking you was my first choice. I just don't understand why after every Aliev land claim over Armenia, which he has done many times over the years [4] [5] [6] [7] [8], hinting at irredentism (I was told that presumably I can't call those claims "irredentist" if there are no sources saying that it is), there needs to be synthesized and included what seems like an apologia quote from a press conference talk. These additions after every land claim just give the false impression to the reader that Aliev *actually* has no land claims or "territorial claims" over Armenia.
I just find this inclusions of the same apologia quote so bizarre and it troubles me how my fellow editors don't see it that way, and persistently argue to keep it. We're here arguing whether a dictator's territorial claims were "clarified" by him or not from a random press conference, or why it even needs to be synthesized and included in the first place, meanwhile just recently, Azerbaijan already infiltrated parts of Armenia Lake Sev#2021 Armenia–Azerbaijan border crisis.
How are these additions to every Aliev land claim display to the reader how the situation actually is and what Azerbaijan is currently doing.
A) Aliev clearly has history of territorial claims over Armenia, directly a quote from Az president's website from 2014:
"Our development will be continued even more rapidly. Therefore, the issue of restoration of our territorial integrity will be resolved without a doubt. Let no-one have any doubts about that. At the same time, I have repeatedly talked about this and want to say again that the Azerbaijanis must return to all our historical lands in the future. And our historical lands are not limited to Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding regions. If we look at the recent history and the statistics of the 19th century, we can see that the area populated by the Azerbaijanis was very large. The present-day Armenia is actually located on historical lands of Azerbaijan. Therefore, we will return to all our historical lands in the future. This should be known to young people and children. We must live, we live and we will continue to live with this idea." [7]
B) Not only he has claims over Armenian territory (this isn't about Karabakh btw, I'm talking about Armenia proper), but as I showed above, Aliev's already doing it, in Lake Sev most recent and prominent one.
Could you please give your thoughts about this and whether supposed "clarification" ought to be included after every Aliev land claim, when clearly, the reality is a lot more in line with what Aliev actually claims and does. And I feel like this addition by Grandmaster: "We will remember our history, but we have no territorial claims to any country, including Armenia" [1] [2] [3], is just an attempt to false balance and again, doesn't portray what the reality is to the reader.
Many thanks in advance. Regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 14:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
For the record, I was told that other third opinions can be asked, quote from Grandmaster: "I have requested a third opinion from a person who was previously involved with AA topics. Feel free to ask for more third opinions."
I had to think of you when this editor came across my wikipedia experience. You blocked him in August 2020. There is an editor who seems to like the same image as Peacetowikied. The recently blocked had a rather disruptive behavior to term it super-diplomatically. Peacetowikied at least had peace in his username. Anyway, both editors are blocked indef. for now. Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 19:15, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
The Origins of COVID-19 case request you are a party to has been accepted under the name COVID-19 and resolved by motion with one remedy which supersedes the community authorized general sanctions with discretionary sanctions. Sanctions made under the previous community general sanctions are now discretionary sanctions and alerts made under the community GS are now DS alerts. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 23:47, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Someone from the UK has been obsessively disrupting pages about religions (Islam in Turkey, Islam in Tunusia, Yazdanism, Alevism, Islam...)
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/213.107.66.4
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/80.2.21.124
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/92.234.73.94
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/217.137.42.32
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/213.107.1.41
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/217.137.41.183
They used at least 5 different ips to revert user:KurdeEzidi on a page yesterday. I am reading & contributing on those pages recently ( /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/46.221.85.78) and have been noticing those disruptive ips on many pages about religions.
I suspect that they are probably this blocked ip:
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/92.40.183.184
46.221.74.215 ( talk) 08:03, 17 June 2021
I am appealing at /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Astral_Leap_appealing -- Astral Leap ( talk) 09:55, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Sunshine! | |
Hello El C! Interstellarity ( talk) has given you a bit of sunshine to brighten your day! Sunshine promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the sunshine by adding {{subst: User:Meaghan/Sunshine}} to someone else's talk page, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. In addition, you can spread the sunshine to anyone who visits your userpage and/or talk page by adding {{ User:Meaghan/Sunshine icon}}. Happy editing! Interstellarity ( talk) 14:25, 20 June 2021 (UTC) |
Happy first day of summer, El C!! Interstellarity ( talk) 14:25, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you for protecting articles in June, with some impressions of places, flowers and music for you. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Requesting reduction in protection to "Permanent semi-protected" so we can open up the page to another section of Wikipedia editors. (Added bonus is we are treating it the same as the Labour Party so it wont seem like playing favoritism!) Of course if the sockpuppetry continues, I will have no problem increasing protection permanently again! B. M. L. Peters ( talk) 03:14, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, you indicated in an edit summary that you wanted a reminder to restore indef semi-protection to Ilhan Omar after the one-week protection ended. Firefangledfeathers ( talk) 18:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
....about Omar. I hinted as much when I put on the year's protection. If any further proof was needed: less than half an hour after the full protection expired - in other words while the article was very briefly unprotected - there was another BLP violation by another IP. I even wonder if that article is going to have to go to ECP, but for now I completely agree with indef semi. -- MelanieN ( talk) 23:59, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
81.214.82.158 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Hi El C, got another one here;
Because I reverted his edits at Xiongnu [10], which attempted to push a Turkic origin, completely ignoring the other theories, he proceeded to spam my talk page
[11] same comment here
[12] edit summary; 'no.Because of pan-Iranians like you, Wikipedia's accuracy has declined.'
can i talk u in discord or instagram? can you give it to me if you have an account
-- HistoryofIran ( talk) 20:38, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi
You recently blocked Lenchmobbin ( talk · contribs) for deceptive editing and poor communication, after my nomination. My quick question now is how do I most efficiently undo the damage they did? It would be a lot of work to go through all the articles and figure out what remains of their changes and what needs to be reverted, and since there are intervening edits I would have to do it all manually. Is there a quicker way with some tool or something, or do I just have to suck it up and do it the hard way? Thanks in advance for any help! Knuthove ( talk) 17:02, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
to get serious: ... and the first performance was on a Palm Sunday which is today, and Yoninah's obituary today with the beginning of Passover - putting some little ego-battles in perspective -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:57, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
... and today is the day I want to be praised for having been able to suppress the urge to thank for the TFA ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:33, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() | |
wild garlic |
---|
You may be interested in the TFA on Easter Sunday that played a role in my life! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:28, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
bears and bumble bees— intrigued. El_C 14:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Could you give Hebrew to Psalm 104, please. In the news. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:04, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Fruit of you labour: memories on the Main page today, Psalm 115 thinking of Yoninah, Christa Ludwig and Milva, - voices that made the Earth a better place. Sad that the psalm hook didn't appear on Earth Day as planned, but better pictured and late than going unnoticed ;) - Will work on Psalm 68 when done with the mezzo. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:49, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Enjoy two ladies today, one played in an iconic film, the other sang in the premiere of a famous opera, with her husband-to-be ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:47, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Today: Kammermusik (Hindemith), - don't miss caricature, "badboy" and the review! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:52, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Today: Thomas Fritsch, the German voice of Diego in Ice Age. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Today: pictured white and blue - birthday of a friend whose name was in the credits for Ice Age, if you waited a while -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:37, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Today: the lead DYK, "useless but meaningful", or a dream-com-true pictured -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Just FYI - Immediately after your one week protection of Joke Singh expired, newly registered editors were back to vandalising it. I posted the page at WP:RPP. Thanks. 10mmsocket ( talk) 08:28, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I have an old one for you. You blocked this user back in August 2020. They were advised of the standard offer the next day by another admin. See User talk:YashPratap1912#Standard offer
They have been asking for an unblock and getting ignored for some time now. They seem to have expressed an understanding as to why they were blocked and made a clear promise not to engage in the same behavior. They have also described areas that they intend to edit in. They have also gone well over 6 months without visible problematic behavior.
I have had a checkuser confirm that there is no technical evidence of evasion in the last 6 months.
Before doing anything I wanted to consult with you. My understanding is that they were blocked for misusing multiple accounts, possibly in a deletion discussion, though I am having trouble finding the discussion in question. Perhaps you remember the details?
I want to make sure there was nothing egregious like death threats or extended block evasion or anything else that would preclude the standard offer. I also want to know how you personally feel about the matter.
If they are unblocked I will be monitoring their talk page for troubles and have already informed them that they can be reblocked if there is any trouble. Thank you for your time. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 22:52, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, thanks for protecting Jalen Green. I noted that you only protected it until July 3. Given that it has already been protected once this year and was the target of vandalism by multiple IPs in the last few days, none of which will be over until he is actually drafted, I ask that you extend protection until after the NBA draft.-- User:Namiba 13:34, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hi, once again... This disruptive user Лобачев Владимир simply refuses to give up and wants to start a new edit warring at article Pahonia by reinserting already removed information ( HIS EDIT). You gave a warning to stop such malicious activity at this article, but he clearly doesn't care. Can he be finally blocked for his malicious activity? Otherwise, he will obviously perform it again and again, and again because he doesn't care about warnings. He has also recently performed edit warring at article Moldavia ( here is warning to him for 3RR rule violation). He was also warned for disruptive editing already in 2018 ( warning from his talk page). Please finally stop this disruptive user who constantly provokes edit warring and violates various rules of Wikipedia. -- Pofka ( talk) 14:05, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
User talk:Amaan4210 he is removing sourced content continuously without explaining, you can check Pakistan article, I request you to please stop his disruptive edit and block him... Sumit ( talk) 05:07, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I'd like to you look at Fidesz, it seems like the page is under attack by a sockpuppet named SmalforaGiant, a lot of information was added without previous consensus on the talk page. I did revert their edits but some unknown user has reverted them back. I've RPPed the page just in case but again I need someone to take a look. There was also a sockpuppet investigation launched 3 days ago by Martopa here since three different IPs with same edits have been doing this on a couple of different pages. Cheers, -- Vacant0 ( talk) 13:32, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. could you please have a word with Marmandie? Basically, they kept adding nonsensical material to the Ma al-'Aynayn article and edit warring over it. My attempts at trying to explain to them that what they are doing is nonsensical made no difference and now they are adding irrelevant/nationalist content to the article. Thanks. M.Bitton ( talk) 14:08, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Wanna help with a persistent main page error? Just seven bytes to you, but "former" is a powerful word for us. And nice to hear for native Minnesotans, too, probably. InedibleHulk ( talk) 21:37, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
( ←) It was fun while it lasted... now you're just randomly apologizing to Finland for reasons unknown! DanCherek ( talk) 02:47, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Helsinki-is-hot-this-season!.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:15, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Did you not ban User:Michaelm? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moxy ( talk • contribs)
I assume you don't follow the British red tops? They're in one of their periodical feeding frenzies, for reasons I have no interest at all in trying to understand. As usual, it's basically uninformed he said/she said speculation. The Forgers' Gazette has even been running a series on new explanations for the Death of Diana, traditionally the preserve of the Daily Excrement. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Could ye take a look at the history please. Cheers! —— Serial 12:25, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, what is the exact reason of Rojava page protection update? I don't demand decrease. BerkBerk68 ( talk) 21:28, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I want that you see this article once and if I or someone else has made a mistake in editing it, then correct it.(Article- Hajipur ) I want to make this article better, its an request... Thank you... ItsSkV08 ( talk) 03:42, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Hey i see you semi protected Cr1TiKaL and i just wanted to thank you for it. My question is can you make the protection permanent like other youtubers because it seems the protection expires in September. Thank you. MrMclovin ( talk) 04:12, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining. MrMclovin ( talk) 02:14, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, I saw that you declined the page protection request for Evyatar as pre-emptive. I completely agree that is pre-emptive, but respectfully disagree with that as a reason not to protect the page. My understanding of the Arbitration Committee rulings on the Israel-Palestine conflict is that articles related to the conflict are supposed to be given pre-emptive 500/30 protection. Evyatar is an Israeli outpost in the West Bank, which makes it a prime candidate for this protection. If I have misunderstood the rulings then please accept my apologies. RoanokeVirginia ( talk) 13:41, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
RoanokeVirginia, just noting that the settlement was vacated without incident today ( diff), and, not to jinx it, also without incident here on Wikipedia. El_C 16:10, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
This is regarding Manticore ( talk · contribs), and why I didn't full-protect the article instead of partially blocking the two editors reverting each other.
Before partial blocks existed, I would have protected. Nobody likes to be blocked. Even though I know that blocks are only ever placed to prevent disruption and are never punishment and never personal, they still brass people off, because they stay as a permanent record on your user log for ever and ever, with all context for them stripped away.
However, not all administrators agree with this approach. For example, in Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Robert McClenon 2, Iridescent wrote "This [protecting instead of blocking] is directly contrary to both established Wikipedia policy and to custom and practice, in which the only occasions full protection should be considered as a response to a content dispute are multi-party disputes in which so many people are involved that blocking is not a realistic option—remember, every time you protect a page you're preventing everyone from editing it, not just the people involved in the dispute." Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:05, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
I need some help to really leave for my own health, which is not compatible with the en.wp environment. My request: please delete all my empty user-space pages, permanently block me, including throughout my own user space and protect my user space against edits by non-admins. Otherwise, please point me to where I might find an admin who might be prepared to do so. — Quondum 11:00, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
Don't know why, but I seem to recall a while back seeing a "semi-retired" banner on your page. Great to see that it is not so. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia ( talk) 14:22, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
I know you're "not taking requests" at the moment, but since you're more involved in the issue of Volunteer Marek's behavior than anyone else, [14] [15] [16] I'm keeping you appraised:
That's five editors, two ANIs [23] [24] and a lot of time wasted, when his actual contribution to these articles is close to nil. [25] [26] [27]
Cheers. François Robere ( talk) 11:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Hey, El C. Hope you're well. The museum article which the new account added doesn't discuss at all Androutsos's origin - not one word - and they removed a source which discussed their origin. The other new account which is doing the same thing is Mercurius1 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). They're adding random sources to articles and claiming Greek origin for Byzantine emperors, but the sources don't propose Greek origin; in fact they discuss non-Greek backgrounds [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] It should have been mentioned in the summary that their activity is part of a broader behavioral pattern across many articles by specific new accounts and there is no "correct version" to protect, but I still feel that such behavior by new accounts shouldn't get any presence on live versions. These accounts know that their edits will get verified and will get removed sooner or later. The validation they're seeking is to keep their "work" online as much as possible.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 12:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, another IP has repeated the name change on Melinda French Gates that led you to protect the page a few days ago, shortly after the protection expired today. Can you renew the protection? ― Tartan357 Talk 00:06, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
LOL what exactly do they think they'll get out of a spam edit summary. SMDH. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:17, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, could you semi-protect List of presidents of Myanmar? Thanks. ― Tartan357 Talk 02:11, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
The Battle of Kosovo article was semi-protected indefinitely a few days ago due to disruption by IPs. Since then, there have been new rounds of reverting cycles. Today, new user Istinar breached WP:3RR by making 4 reverts. Can you keep an eye on the article or put a short full-protection, or maybe place a short message on that editor's tp? To be clear, I am not involved in the current dispute, just have the article on my watchlist. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 13:09, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
I just noticed that you blocked Istinar ( talk · contribs) from a page in the WP:ARBMAC space. They have also recently added a fair bit of toxicity at Talk:Denial of the genocide of Serbs in the Independent State of Croatia, so you might want to examine applying more sanctions to enforce the rules of decorum. I am involved, because I tried to reason with them; silly me. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 19:52, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
I was going to do a full protection on this as many of the accounts involved are 500+ but it's a nightmare and I didn't want to protect the wrong version!! There's been canvassing on and off en-wiki (one sided, from what I see currently) on this article as is seen here. I also placed a canvass banner on the talk page discussion which has more drive by participation on both sides. I blocked a couple of accounts (one incorrectly as sock, it was an off-wiki canvassed meatpuppet) Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Emdad Tafsir/Archive. There's another really old sock farm on the other side too, with a couple of recently blocked socks. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rajputbhatti/Archive. — Spaceman Spiff 13:16, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Hey navjyot ? I did nothing ? This is not a white washing campaign . It's not someone's personal blog , this is Wikipedia we have to maintain the neutrality which your article was unable to . Please don't do this Maaz143 ( talk) 21:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
It's postmodern multimedia deconstructive commentary. E Eng 20:39, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. You WP:GOLD protected 2022 Punjab Legislative Assembly election for a week at the end of June, but the same editors have returned to reverting each other now that the protection has worn out. One of the editors involved did post something on the article talk page, but that never got a response and only led to more reverts. Would you mind taking a look at this again? Perhaps a "last warning" from an administrator to those involved might finally encourage them to start discussing their differences instead of just reverting each other. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 05:19, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi can you please review and fix Economy of Pakistan article since this edit [38] by @Mohammad Adnon Khan article is not showing properly on mobile version. Ytpks896 ( talk) 11:55, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I need guidance with someone who is trying to get around the revert rule by using different addresses.
An IP editor returns periodically to
List of accolades received by Carol (film) to make the same disruptive edit using a different IP address each time. It's been done 6 times as of today. I first issued a warning on
3 July 2021, and today a second one,
12 July 2021. This time I added the following to the template: "Whether it is as IP 2601:1c0:c700:3030:7844:6361:113b:7708 ; 2601:1c0:c700:3030:f81d:132d:b3a6:324 ; 2601:1c0:c700:3030:f88d:3db7:5498:7ce1 ; 2601:1c0:ce00:4b70:892:2fde:7119:bdd2 ; 2601:1c0:ce00:4b70:702f:48e0:c204:763 ; or now 2601:1c0:ce00:4b70:6988:a42a:30ef:9b64 — this is the same IP editor making the same disruptive edits." Never explains what row is being changed, and never explains the reason for the change. How is a one-track-mind editor like this stopped?
Pyxis Solitary
(yak). L not Q.
10:12, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for how you handled the Adamant1 ani case, you could have chosen a harsher verdict but you decided to be kind about it . On their behalf I want to thank you for that. Celestina007 ( talk) 14:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
I understand the ban of the wikiproject. Can you delete all the pages related to our wikiproject? Thanks (Participants and Template link etc, I can send links if its necessary.). BerkBerk68 ( talk) 20:35, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Please take notice and go to /info/en/?search=Talk:Blackjack to read “Informal Motion to Remove All References Placed by Objective3000 in Blackjack, Card counting, Martingale (betting system), and Shuffle track and Wherever They May Also Appear in Wikipedia Articles to His Self-published Commercial Websites qfit and blackjackincolor and Others Not Identified.” This Notice of Informal Motion is also placed as a courtesy at the user talk pages of those who have shown interest in the subject, namely, TransporterMan, Orangemike, QFIT, El C, and Rray.
Extended content.
El_C
22:24, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
|
---|
The Informal Motion is placed, as per request by Rray, on the talk page of Blackjack and in addition on those of Card counting, Martingale (betting system), and Shuffle track. Because El C is the user who convicted me and sentenced me (Editing from 2600:1700:5651:2780:0:0:0:0/64 has been blocked (disabled) by El C), I respectfully take the liberty of providing additional information here. Disclosures. Apparently using an IP address to contribute is a violation, so I have adopted the screen name of Aabcxyz. All my statements are supported by evidence, which I present at the said talk pages. In the comments that follow I provide additional evidence in parentheses. For the benefit of El C as well as for that of all who read this, a user has volunteered to review my comments before I post them to ensure that no further violation of wikipedia rules inadvertently occurs. Issue #1. On June 19, El C put a stop of my editing resulting from allegations posted by Objective3000 using an ID other than Objective3000. The allegations were 1) vandalism, 2) use of multiple IP accounts, 3) a third allegation using Wikipedia jargon to which I am not familiar. This was a star chamber proceeding, not allowing a defense and not providing the identity of the plaintiff, here the accuser. Because I had removed citations to the self-published webpages of Objective3000, it was a direct conclusion that he had filed the complaint, verified by looking at his user log, in which Objective3000 used a different user ID. (Evidence: 19 June 2021 IP vandalism • Card counting (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) • Blackjack (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Temp semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. 16 or so repeated deletions in the last week by multiple related IPs. Refusal to go to TP. O3000, Ret. (talk) 14:20, 19 June 2021 (UTC) /info/en/?search=File:Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg User(s) blocked. El_C 16:23, 19 June 2021 (UTC) ) Concerning allegation 1, I removed multiple references put in place by Objective3000 (the evidence for this allegation appears at Blackjack and Card counter talk pages) as self-published web pages with commercial content. Only one other edit, to improve the quality of Blackjack was made. I considered the removal of citations one of cleansing rather than vandalism; no actual informative page content was removed. Concerning allegation 2 by Objective3000, the evidence (log of my edits at the two pages) not only does not support the allegation but DIRECTLY REFUTES IT. I can respectfully suggest that these weak and verifiably false allegations should not have passed muster for conviction. I take note that Objection3000 uses at least two other ID’s, O3000 (Talk of Card counting, section 24, O3000 (talk) 20:34, 17 November 2017) and O3000, Ret. (User talk:Objective3000 ; O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:17, 10 January 2021 (UTC)) If an allegation of use of “multiple IP accounts” is grounds for being banned, then certainly use of three is grounds, unless there is something I don’t understand (highly likely) or the rules of Wikipedia are to be construed arbitrarily and capriciously. I also take note that Rray had not worked on Wikipedia since May 30, 2021, when he quizzically, of the millions of articles on Wikipedia, decided to visit Blackjack and Card counting on June 14, 2021, to reverse my deletions of citations placed by Objective3000 to his self-published webpages, with the comment to “assume good faith.” He also commented on Card counting, “These references have been here for years.” If there is a statute of limitations relevant to violations of WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS (see Issue #4 below), it might be put forth as an affirmative defense, but I have found nothing in Wikipedia rules to that effect. Issue #2: One of my actions was to delete at Blackjack under Blackjack Literature a link placed by Objective3000 to his webpage “book.” That was reversed. On consideration, Rray validated my concern and removed the link based on “This doesn't really fit in with the rest of the books on this list for obvious reasons.” (22:15 15 June 2021). That justification was articulated by me on my act of removal: Blackjack literature: self-promotion of commercial website; not a peer-reviewed book like all the others cited; shameful abuse of WP for self-advertising (1:29 12 June 2021). In light of Rray’s deletion, which stands, that act does not constitute vandalism in the eyes of other users. Issue #3. The evidence shows that before 8/31/2007, no citations to Objective3000’s self-published commercial webpages existed on Blackjack, Card counting, Hole carding, and Martingale (betting system), and Shuffle track. After that date, the evidence shows that Objective3000 inserted citations to his self-published webpages with commercial content, namely, qfit and blackjackincolor, more than once a month in the next six months. At the talk pages of Blackjack and Card counting the evidence that ten such insertions were made by Objective3000 is presented. Under the doctrine of argumentum ad ignorantiam, I cannot say whether others subsequently inserted such citations in these or other webpages, but the evidence is irrefutable that a) Objective3000 inserted such citations to the five articles in the six months after he became active, b) NO OTHER user had inserted citations in the five articles to either of these self-published webpages BEFORE he became active, and c) NO OTHER user inserted such citations to any of these articles during the six month period examined. Issue #4. It was interesting to find that currently Hole carding lacks the two citations to Objective3000’s self-published websites that he had placed on 12/24/2007 (see Blackjack for evidence). A search through the log shows that from 23 December 2010 through 27 December 2010 two users tried to remove references that Objective3000 had placed to his websites. (See Issue #5 and Hole carding talk page for Evidence.) On 27 December 2010 user TransporterMan began a discussion with Objection3000 based on the merits of citations inserted by Objection3000 to qfit and blackjackincolor being in violation of both WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS.. TransporterMan noted the following on the talk page of Hole carding: “Let me note in passing, however, that the links being removed appear to me to be very iffy as reliable sources to support the assertions in the article. TransporterMan (TALK) 14:43, 27 December 2010.” The rest of the discussion appears on the talk page of Hole carding, including his opinion that WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS are being violated and that a referral to Reliable Sources Noticeboard about these sources would substantiate his opinion, stating “I'm fairly certain of my analysis and the probable outcome.” To summarize, TransporterMan finds fault lies in Objective3000 not being an expert according to the Wikipedia definition “Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. None of Objective3000’s “work,” using his actual name as provided on his commercial webpages, has either been published as a peer-reviewed journal contribution, been accepted for presentation as a paper at a scholarly meeting (Evidence: google scholar, https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/authors.html), or has not been published in book form by reliable third-party publications (Evidence: amazon.com search). One may conjecture, sine testimonio, that Objective3000’s not pursuing the matter with TransporterMan was a case of discretion over valor: The Hole carding article has about 50 daily visits, whereas Blackjack and Card counting together have about 2300 daily visits, 50 times more traffic. A determination that the citations to qfit and Blackjackincolor violated the doctrines of WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS would be global rather than local, meaning that such citations would necessitate removal from ALL wikipedia articles. Apparently, an appeal to the Reliable Sources Noticeboard committee suggested by TransporterMan was pursued by neither Meisner nor Objective3000. Such a determination for removal, the probable outcome according to TransporterMan, would have been dispositive. Issue #5. The evidence shows that others have disputed the appropriateness of Objective3000’s citations to this self-published webpages. I was not the first. The evidence in the TransporterMan discussion indicates one such user. In Fred Bauder’s personal page, User_talk:Fred_Bauder#Conflict_of_Interest.2FAdvertising.2FContentiousness, there is evidence of two others, Mr. Bauder himself and a user referred to by Objective3000 (Objective3000 (talk) 14:22, 6 September 2011), wherein Objective3000 refers to the banning of the user. In Hole carding, two users removed the references placed by Objective3000. One got banned for life. (Evidence presented at Hole carding.) In four instances, including mine, the modus operandi of Objective3000 is to begin the process of getting those objectors banned from editing for vandalism or other causes. Under the doctrine of argumentum ad ignorantiam, I cannot say whether other users have found citations to qfit and blackjackincolor inappropriate and whether Objective3000 files claims of vandalism or other causes against them to get them banned, but the implication survives on its own merits. In such cases, judging from the editing histories of these four users, the objectors are new users on Wikipedia and fell prey to violation of its guidelines as alleged by Objection3000 to protect his citations. That was certainly the situation in my regard. Issue #6. On June 19, 2021, Objective3000 posted a message asking that Blackjack and Card counting be given protected status. This action is taken to cease inappropriate editing on controversial articles, articles about celebrities and political figures, and the such, not to ensure that Objective3000’s citations to his self-published webpages with commercial content be preserved. Both Blackjack and Card counting have the lowest ranking of completed article, C-class, the editing needs of which are described as “Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems.” Yet, Objective3000 wanted both protected. |
In consideration of the above, I will respectfully continue to seek the following relief by any and all means appropriate and legal under Wikipedia guidelines: a) Removal of citations to Objective3000’s self-published webpages with commercial content globally and prohibition of additional citations being made by any user to the self-published webpages with commercial content, or, in the interests of a settlement, b) retention of the citations but under the condition that all commercial advertising be therein removed by Objective3000 or his agent, including but not restricted to banner ads and links to software sale sites complete with pricing, such a settlement requiring a published waiver of their policy from the Reliable Sources Noticeboard committee concerning establishment of expert standing and other relevant criteria for posting of references to self-published material. Aabcxyz ( talk) 22:07, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
Floquenbeam, the title of my post was originally "Informal Motion to Remove All References Placed by Objective3000 in Blackjack, Card counting, and Shuffle track and Wherever They May Also Appear in Wikipedia Articles to His Self-published Commercial Websites qfit and blackjackincolor." The Informal Motion appears at Blackjack. Since you requested more detail, I will copy what I originally posted here at your user_talk. Thanks for your interest in keeping articles free of commercial content. Aabcxyz ( talk) 22:51, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
It may be my imagination -- but I don't think this person likes me. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 16:31, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Can’t believe I missed this. The IP range that you temp blocked is in Oak Park, Ill. This is the home of an editor with a dozen socks [44]. This is one of the AfDs over articles about himself written by these socks. [45] He also attempted to add material about himself to the blackjack page back then. I took part in that AfD ten years ago and he spent months hounding me, by phone, email, and other sites. I removed personal info about myself from my user page as a result. That was ten years ago and he quoted that diff two days ago on the blackjack TP. I’m uncomfortable filing an SPI as the target of his attacks. I suppose I could go to Beeblebrox, who participated in the AfD, the SPI, and is a CU. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 12:10, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C! Regarding your decision to only temporarily protect WT:Article wizard, I can't help but see this as just unnecessarily kicking the can down the road. There's no reason to think that newcomers will somehow stop making test edits two years from now, and every reason to think they'll resume just the same as they resumed as soon as the previous protection expired, creating more work for vandalism patrollers and for whoever sets up the next round of protection. It's unfortunate that the gigantic {{ Talkpage of help}} notice isn't enough to stop the junk, but that's the situation. Newcomers will still have the Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/feedback page (linked from a banner on the wizard talk page) to give feedback. Other talk pages in similar positions such as Help talk:Introduction have been indefinitely semi'd, and as I said in my request, I really think that's the clear best course of action here. {{u| Sdkb}} talk 00:13, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C, hope you're doing well. Would you like to reinstate semi-protection at the Battle of Saragarhi article now that the full protection has expired? DanCherek ( talk) 13:53, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello El C.I am sorry to bother You.An user named Advaita222 is involved in edit war in the Baidya page.In spite of my invitation to talk page,He is continuously reverting the consensus version.The version was approved by one of our Senior editors Ekdalian ckeck it here.I have warned him.Can You please help me to handle this.Thanks.Regards. Abhishek Sengupta 24 ( talk) 14:21, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello. A while back you were asking for a archive of WP:ARCA requests. Although it is not complete and will still take a few weeks for me to finish, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Clarification and Amendment requests is an index of all clarification and amendment requests excluding requests moved elsewhere (such as to AE) or requests removed without consideration by the arbitrators. It contains the a link to case or decision affected, a permalink to the request, the date the request was opened, the date the request was closed, and finally relevant links which is currently only permalinks to any enacted motion in the request. Hopefully this is useful. As it's currently being worked on it's not yet linked to from other places, but I plan to un-orphan the page once all entries are backfilled. After the index is complete there may be other improvements made to the archiving process for ARCA requests. Hope this index is useful. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 22:31, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, can you indef ECP Isaac Herzog? He's the president of Israel, WP:A/I/PIA really should be applied. ― Tartan357 Talk 05:14, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
The sig says 15:08 but the edit history says 15:09 so.... Best, Barkeep49 ( talk) 15:15, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
I'd completely forgotten about the paid editor making a complaint. There are plenty of other reviewers who will handle their future submissions. I don't check who the creating editor is when I make a review, though. I just look at quality of the draft. I imagine they would like their payment. That tends to mean they must do their work well enough for articles to be accepted.
On the rare occasions I get dragged to ANI I tend to let my edits speak for themselves. There is little point in mounting a defence because the defence is already present in the history concerned, and folk will make whatever judgements they choose, as is their right. It is also the right fo any editor who feels the need to take any other editor there. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 06:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
I would like to ask that you restore the original version of the article without the added category. User:Jaydoggmarco added the Category:Anti-vaccination activists to the article on June 16th as shown on this revision. [ [46]] It was reverted several times by other editors and IPs before I stepped in and gave my two cents. It was fine for over a month before Jaydoggmarco (who has been wikihounding me for basically his entire edit history since early June [ [47]]) decides to revert it again. Of course since contentious changes such as that must be discussed first on the talk page as opposed to just adding them and reverting, I opened up a discussion. It went unanswered until yesterday, despite my constantly explaining I wanted to discuss. Calton stated "nobody works for you" and reverted without adding anything to the discussion section. [ [48]] I feel that it is appropriate to have the original version of the article prior to the change be the version that is protected, at least until a consensus can be reached. Thank you for taking the time to read this. TJD2 ( talk) 06:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Something is going on L. Murugan page, seems to be a heavy vandalism, maybe protection for the page is needed for few days, please look into this matter Nahtrav ( talk) 12:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
I believe On both Covid 19 and Covid 19 Pandemic articles that extended confirmed protection is not necessary. Natadmim ( talk) 14:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Dear @ El C, would you mind giving your input as a third party on Talk:Lavash#Recent revert page? We have a dispute with regard to which wording is more appropriate. The editor I'm having a dispute with, @ Wikaviani, also pinged two other editors for third opinion. There's also a need to clarify whether pinging an editor who gave you a barnstar would breach WP:CANVASSING and WP:THIRD. The second editor they pinged tries to convince me it doesn't, but I'm not sure. Thanks in advance. Best regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 08:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the compliment El C, not sure what I have done to deserve it. I guess Wikaviani's ping did not work, seeing how I did not receive a notice. As for Lavash, meh, I see
reliable sources stating both origins, no need to give
undue weight to one or the other.
PS:Has ZaniGiovanni been notified of AA2 sanctions on their talk page? I see that after coming off a one week block their first edit was to make a revert on an AA2 article. --
Kansas Bear (
talk)
17:11, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
I have been editing Wikipedia since 2007 and this discussion closure may have been the most inspiring and beautiful thing I have ever seen. BOTTO ( T• C) 23:54, 18 July 2021 (UTC) |
Hi, it seems since your protection of That Vegan Teacher expired a few days ago, the number of vandalism incidents has increased again. Could you have another look whether protection is needed per WP:BLP? Thanks -- hroest 14:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
I do, in fact, see what you did there. ;) theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) ( they/them) 17:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello :) I am writing my MA dissertation on Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. My dissertation will look at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article.
For more information, you can check out my meta-wiki research page or my user page, where I will be posting my findings when I am done.
I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out this quick survey before 8 August 2021.
Participation in this survey is entirely voluntary and anonymous. There are no foreseeable risks nor benefits to you associated with this project.
Thanks so much,
Sarah Sanbar
Sarabnas I'm researching Wikipedia Questions? 20:19, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Ok, maybe I was exaggerating with many
, I had just become weary of all the disruption. Thanks for the protection anyways.
IronManCap (
talk)
21:56, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
This made me laugh--thanks for the help. Alyo ( chat· edits) 23:09, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, how have you been? I need you to give an opinion, if/when time permits. I asked on June 14 @ Joy: on their talk page to give me an opinion about or help to deal with a disruptive editor. Joy did not respond. Yesterday you blocked that disruptive editor indefinitely. Since Joy did not react at all to my post on their talk page, I removed it [49]. I wrote in the edit summary "Indefinitely blocked by an admin. When someone asks for sth, the most humane and civilized way is to respond, even with a simple "I cant help". Joy insists that I insulted him, though I told him that I was not saying that Joy is not humane or civilized, and that I did not want to insult him. What I meant with the edit summary is that when someone asks your for sth, the most humane and and civilized thing to do is to not ignore, but to give a response (even a "I can't help you"). I also told him I know he is not obliged to help me. However, Joy insists that I should learn English and that I insulted him. I ask you as an experienced admin who has given help to both Joy and myself: should my edit summary be seen as an insult to Joy? If so, can the edit summary be deleted? Ktrimi991 ( talk) 18:25, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I have a question for you. I don't think the ANI complaint by Fram is justified or should to me being indefed. Since it's clearly retaliation because I wouldn't answer him how and when he wanted me to. Nothing I have done that led to this or the last complaint has been anywhere on par of the behavior that caused the original block either. I've made a lot of progress since then. It's obvious people just want to get me blocked though and I was planning on appealing if I get indefed.
That said, I do feel like I could use a break from this for my own mental health. The general level of toxicity I've been dealing with lately and things going on IRL have been causing me some hardcore anxiety that I just can't be 100% solid due to right now. And I realize I'm going to keep having issues if I'm not able to be 100% solid about things. So I wanted to propose a six month block to cool down, reflect on what led to this, and work on my IRL issues. Realistically, even if the ANI complaint doesn't lead to an indef I still want to step away for a while and cool down. So is there a way to propose a six month block or have it happen without it seeming like I'm trying to weasel out of a permanent block or bludging the process? -- Adamant1 ( talk) 08:21, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
Not trying to be mean, but did you really need to fully protect Hyatt Regency walkway collapse? Why were you so quick to press the 'fully protect' button when extended confirmed lock or auto-confirmed lock would've been much better to use? I know it's an edit war.. but it's literally just mainly IPs.. and it's not a BLP article or a very pressing issue. I fail to see why a full protect is needed here. wizzito | say hello! 22:27, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
We edit conflicted before your ping.
![]() |
Talk:Cleveland Guardians got separated from Cleveland Indians. Cards 84664 14:21, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics/Evidence. Please add your evidence by August 6, 2021, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Moneytrees🏝️ Talk/ CCI guide 18:41, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
I noticed that their op-eds are really not on par with their news, but there likely are other sources, — Paleo Neonate – 07:59, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
The institute was carrying out experiments using chimeric viruses with modified spike proteins, tested on mice with respiratory cells genetically altered to resemble those of humans. The goal was to see which were more infective. These experiments were written into grant applications, including for U.S. funds; the research began in 2014-2015 and was underway at the institute through 2019. The work was not done in the highest biosecurity level laboratory. (from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/23/china-is-stepping-up-its-deception-denial-investigations-covid-19/)
spreading disinformation that it came from a U.S. military laboratory.I doubt the Washington Post editorial board is that easy to fool, but maybe...? They certainly do not seem to be as science-silly as certain other editorial boards of major newspapers that also start with the letter W. As for the US funding angle, I suppose we'll see whether the Biden admin's appetite for investigating COVID's origins will extend to when Biden, himself, was VP... El_C 10:09, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Many of the arguments re: how genetic engineering is relevant to the pandemic or its origins are missing the point. As I described in some more detail over at the GoFR talk page, it doesn't even necessarily matter whether the WIV was trying to make GoFR viruses (and it is heavily disputed). If the relevant experts who understand how to analyze virus genomes have said SARS-COV-2 was extremely likely not engineered, based on their analysis of the genome, its spread, the biochemistry, etc. then we should trust what they say in peer-reviewed secondary literature reviews published in scientific journals, [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] over what the Washington Post editorial board says.
This editorial also made some key statements, that proclaim certain experiments involving viruses collected from bats were "gain of function." What they leave out, is that there is significant debate among the relevant experts about whether or not those experiments, in fact, qualify... What follows is more detail about that.
There are experts who have come down on both sides of whether or not there was "Gain-of-function research"
|
---|
Richard Ebright (emeritus professor at Rutgers who is a bacteriologist and biosafety researcher) told The Washington Post that he thinks they qualify: [6]
The EcoHealth Alliance's position (The US-based Nonprofit who subcontracted the sampling of bat viruses in the grant proposal to the WIV), as described by their spokesperson, believes it does not count: [6]
MIT molecular biologist Alina Chan (also pro-lab leak, interestingly) has argued that these experiments would not have been affected by the 2014 moratorium: [7]
Many scientists have thoughts on both sides, but the entire scientific community was in uproar when this grant was rescinded due to political pressure. [8] Scientists really hate when you overtly mix politics with their science. The grant was later reinstated due to this uproar. [9] [10] Scientists of different persuasions of whether it "counted" were also upset about the lack of transparency in the review process, about whether or not research "counts." They want those reviewing panels to be more open. Notable examples include Angela Rasmussen and David Relman. [11] |
And what about the controversial Menachery et al paper in 2015, about SHC014?
|
---|
There's also been questions raised about a 2015 paper that was a collaboration between the Baric lab and Zhengli's lab at the WIV, which could be what the editorial board is referring to here. [12] Importantly, this paper involved pseudoviruses (which cannot replicate and are more similar to vaccines than bioweapons). Any expert on viruses could tell you that this was not gain-of-function, because pseudoviruses cannot function as viruses. [13] All they do is get into a cell, they cannot make more of themselves or, most importantly, get out of the cell. Ralph Baric, who was lead author on that paper, does not believe that work qualified: [6]
There aren't really a lot of reliable sources describing experts who believe it did qualify. At least none I could find published in RSes. Baric's lab did also infect transgenic mice with the virus, but only in ways that fundamentally did not increase the ability of the virus to replicate or infect human cells. [14] Mostly because the natural virus could already do it! "Gain-of-function" refers to when a virus is enabled to replicate more inside human hosts. Not when it is simply already able to infect them, and scientists show this. The NIH ultimately determined this did not fall under the 2014 research moratorium. [15] |
And were they working with viruses at dangerously "unprotected" biosafety conditions?
|
---|
The MIT Technology Review article I cited in the preceding collapse suggests there is something wrong with the fact that Baric's lab conducted experiments with this virus at BSL3, whereas Zhengli's lab at the WIV handled them at BSL2: This argument is leaving out an extremely important aspect, though: This is exactly what the CDC's Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories manual recommends that we do! [16] The Technology Review omission makes sense, because they do not have PhDs in virology or biosafety etc. SHC014 has never shown any propensity for causing disease in humans. Biosafety reviews by IBC committees (at the WIV and UNC) have likely determined that it is safe to handle them in vitro (outside animals) at BL2 and in vivo (in animals) at BSL3+ (although we are not privy to these institutional panel discussions, only independent scientists and community members around the institution are in attendance). What I can tell you for sure, though, is that this sort of stepping down in intensity of biosafety controls is an extremely common practice. It's what we do for all sorts of families of viruses, as standard operating procedure in virology, all around the world. By the way, we also handle those bat-like coronaviruses at BSL-2 in vitro here in the United States. [17] We do this stepping down in intensity for many different viruses. Tamiami virus (a close relative of Lassa virus), Ross River virus (a close relative of Semliki Forest virus), or non-neurovirulent strains (e.g. Kunjin) of West Nile all come to mind. All of these are examples of viruses closely related to BSL-3 and 4 viruses that are themselves handled at BSL-2 (and BSL-2+) because they lack a concerning virulence in humans. |
Here's a more personal example from me to you, to help explain the proper biosafety conditions for these pathogens
|
---|
To help illustrate this point, we do the same sort of stepping down in biosafety with hantaviruses, and it was exactly how I handled hantaviruses during my PhD. If the virus has never been shown to infect humans or, specifically, cause disease in humans, but we have evidence that people have generated antibodies against it... [18] (as they also have for these coronaviruses) [19] then we're pretty darn sure it doesn't infect healthy immunocompetent humans. [20] And so in grad school, I handled those non-human pathogenic hantaviruses at BSL-2 or BSL-2+ in petri dishes (e.g. Thottapalayam, Tula, and Prospect Hill viruses), just like how many other researchers at other institutions in the United States do it. [21] [22] Even though the closely related Andes virus and Sin Nombre virus kill 30% of the patients they infect, and are aerosol-transmitted! [23] [24] Scary, right??? Well that's probably why, when I worked with these viruses, [25] I did so at BSL3 and BSL3+. Wearing masks and double gloves and a gown and goggles and a tyvek suit, [26] in a negative air-pressure room, which directed all air in the entire room into HEPA filters in the ceiling. [27] Inside a laminar flow hood that directed all air immediately into HEPA. [28] Whenever we transported samples, we did so inside two air-tight containers, in case anything were ever dropped, so there would be no question of accidental release. When transported by mail, there had to be a third outside air-tight container. When we infected animals with these viruses, we did so at a BSL4 in Montana. Wearing space suits. With a chemical shower at every exit. [29] We were periodically inspected by the CDC at both facilities. I had to write up a biological risk assessment citing every aspect of the disease, and the risk it posed, and the mitigation strategies we had in place, with in-line citations, that was reviewed by both the CDC and our in-house biosafety committee. I had to answer questions about my mental status, any medications I take, etc. And keep at home a kit with a mask, gloves, suit, and goggles. If I ever got sick, I was supposed to put these things on, so that I wouldn't transmit the infection to the paramedics in the ambulance that would come get me, or the physicians and nurses that would take care of me in the E.R. and transport me into an isolation room. |
Okay, smart guy, what about the WIV?
|
---|
Before you say "that's an awful lot of "I"s in that preceding collapse, you should know these are all international standards in high level biosafety with dangerous pathogens. [30] [31] [32] And, we even know that French experts helped set up the WIV's BSL3 and 4 facilities, and inspected them, along with the ISO, who also certify American BSL4 labs. [33] [34] [35] Biosecurity researchers here in the US helped train the researchers there. [36] [37] |
So why do we do that, handle the closely related non-human pathogenic viruses at a lower biosafety level?
|
---|
We do it because biosafety work is difficult, slow, and expensive. And we actually know that too many biosafety controls is also dangerous. Studies have shown that over-gowning physicians and nurses can lead to more infections, because they become fatigued more easily and disrobe and put on the equipment more carelessly. These are the single most important moments in biosafety. How you put on and take off the gear. There are reams and reams of books published about the best way to do this. It's a founding principle of biosafety, that we should not overburden with too many controls. Otherwise, there will be a slow creep towards putting the most expansive and restrictive protections on every experiment. Instead, we put the apropriate amount of biosafety for each experiment. This allows experiments to be conducted more easily (plaque assays, antibody inhibition assays, flow cytometry of cells, etc. which are all quite frustrating to conduct at BSL-3 and 4) which enables faster generation of treatments and vaccines. Of course, eventually, the findings are later replicated on the real-deal human pathogenic viruses, but at the appropriately higher biosafety level. Doing the experiments first on closely related viruses that are more easily (and still safely) handled at BSL-2 (and BSL-2+) means less time is wasted at BSL3 or 4, and that BSL3 and 4 work is conducted more safely. |
TL;DR
|
---|
I don't want you to think I don't have any concerns about the WIV and whether these viruses escaped from a lab. I do have those concerns. I want it to be investigated more deeply, I want China to open up, etc. But what I want to make abundantly clear to you is that there is a lot of misinformation flowing around about these laboratories, their experiments, etc. Often from sources who do not have the necessary expertise to evaluate the claims they make. Can you imagine how frustrating this is? Imagine you were a plumber, and you visit some guy's house, to clear a clogged pipe. And the guy sidles up to you, and elbows you and says "Hello fellow plumbologist. I see you got your snake there, for clearin' clogs...have you ever considered that the lil scratches you make on the sides of the pipe there could actually be serving as nucleation sites for future clogs to form? What if you're actually the one who's causing this clog? Maybe you should pay for it, too, huh?" I don't provide this analogy to say the lab leak is "impossible" like this B.S. plumbing analogy. I provide it to say: this is what it feels like to be constantly in conversations with people who have never set foot in a biosecurity lab, but feel as though they know enough about it to ascertain it is "extremely likely" or in some cases "99% likely" that this virus leaked from a lab. I think it's "unlikely, but requires more investigation" like most virologists. I do not think this op-ed adds anything to that conversation that has not already been hashed out in extreme detail elsewhere, by topic experts. I do not think it adds anything to how we should cover these topics on Wikipedia. I do think we could probably cover more of what I have detailed above in articlespace, but only where it is not WP:OR or WP:UNDUE. The SHC014 controversy, for example, could probably get a paragraph in Gain of function research. But only when included in an NPOV way, that depicts the mainstream scientific view. Like we do with all topics, but especially fringe topics. |
Sources
|
---|
References
|
I'm sorry, I know this is long. but there really is a lot of detail here. The length of detail should be instructive, because it shows a great example of why the WP:OR and WP:SOURCETYPES policies are so important. For some of these debates, a PhD really really helps one understand the intricate details. And we need multiple scientists peer-reviewing each other in how to assess these intricate details. That's why I think discussions of scientific theories like whether or not an experiment qualifies as "gain-of-function" or not, is something we should only source to peer-reviewed literature review articles published in reliable topic-relevant journals!-- Shibbolethink ( ♔ ♕) 18:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)(edited 18:28, 24 July 2021 (UTC))
Can you please tell me why my editing rights are invoked for the article List of converts to Islam from Hinduism? You can read about my edits here. -- Bringtar ( talk) 12:54, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Last year's flowers match the image on the user page nicely, see? - DYK that her last reply to me was in a thread Green for hope? - The DYK set for Yoninah will appear tomorrow, including Psalm 85, with the kiss of justice and peace. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:09, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Shit happens. Music happens. On the Main page now: "my" school. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 15:28, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
This article is being completely revised(result, figures, etc, etc.) [55] [56] by an IP hopping editor. Anyway you could protect it? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 16:36, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
I am not involved in that content dispute, but from a quick look I see it is not going well. While the article is under full protection, the talk page is having highly inflammatory and insulting comments. I am leaving this note, as you might want to leave a civility reminder or a DS template on that tp. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 12:15, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
My pinging of you didn't send. I've responded on my talk page. -- WikiCleanerMan ( talk) 20:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
I have retracted the smear accusation from Talk:Prosperity theology. tgeorgescu ( talk) 04:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
User:Alalch Emis. Thank you.
VQuakr (
talk)
19:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I suppose it's possible the user is aware that I was JIMBO'd in 2009, since, after all, I link prominently to my block log on my userpage. What they may not be aware of is WP:BLOCKABDICATE. Bishonen | tålk 11:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC).
Has been keeping me amused every time I have to wade into that cesspit. Please keep it up. That place needs more levity, and editors like you, EEng and Martinevans are doing God's work.
(And yes, I know what the notification of this looked like, given the title, heh heh). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:20, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
For your interventions in the COVID-19 'lab leak' topic area, and the COVID-19 topic area more generally, last year and early this year. Doesn't go unnoticed! ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 10:20, 29 July 2021 (UTC) |
Could you revdel [ this] edit summary? I pasted by I meant to copy. 92.5.2.97 ( talk) 15:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
El C, if time permits, can you take a look? @ InNeed95: was blocked by @ EdJohnston: two days ago, after I warned them for the misuse of the word "vandalism" when referring to good faith edits made by other editors. After the block expired, InNeed95 insisted on my tp that they were right [57]. On their own tp, they called the block "incorrect charge", defended the misuse of the term "vandalism" and called the blocking admin "incompetent". They did not reflect even after another editor told them that the block was a right action and that the "incompetent admin" comment was a personal attack [58]. What do you think? This editor claims that the situation needs a review. Is this editor suitable for editing controversial Balkan topics? Ktrimi991 ( talk) 20:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
This is the thing, Ktrimi991: that preface notwithstanding, once you've posted the request here, the user who is the subject of the complaint responded to it, then you respond to their response, then they respond to that, and so on. You've sort of put me on the spot where I feel obliged to at the very least glance it and say something, if only to prevent that conversation from just going and going, here, on my talk page. El_C 23:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
sth? Typo? El_C 23:35, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
@
El C:
Greetings User:El C,
I appreciate your will to help. As you said yourself, you dont really have time to review the problem. That is of course understandable. I just want to point out that User:Ktrimi991 claims the whole time that I am defending the use of the word "vandalism" and "incompetent". I stated already above, that the use of those words came thru me feeling offended and at the same time angry/mad towards the other users for not beeing cooperative. As such, I accepted that the use of the words was wrong and next time I will hold my thoughts for myself.
I explained the actual problem on the Talk-Page of User:Ktrimi991. If you have time to read it, I would appriciate a opinion from your side. ( [60])
I wish you a great day and till next time.^^
-- InNeed95 ( talk) 11:05, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Hey El_C, it looks to me like some clerking by an uninvolved admin at AE would be useful right now at the CutePeach thread, but I don't know the norms particularly well. I see that the rules are "500 words and 20 diffs", but given the back-and-forths going on, that seems a little restrictive and asking for permission to extend the comments is excessively bureaucratic at this point. Any suggestions on how to tackle this? GeneralNotability ( talk) 13:20, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
[61] Really? What about unblocking EEng as a way of earning your admin spurs? The most cromulent admins have done that at least three times. [Checks]. OK, I guess that's only one person, then. Bishonen | tålk 07:15, 31 July 2021 (UTC).
I undid the revdel on Dipyridamole...unlike their edits on other pages, this was just insertion of their ref. Still spam obviously, just not copyvio content. DMacks ( talk) 15:19, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
The IP that misspelled your name was previously blocked here [62] and likely the same editor as here [63]. I think it might be HughD but honestly I'm not sure other than it's clear I did something to their Cheerios. Springee ( talk) 01:54, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
What the syntax on one vs two brackets? I've found sometimes I have to use doubles or the link doesn't work. [wp:test] vs wp:test for example. Springee ( talk) 13:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
I really think you're right, that Mjolnirpants/Springee ANI would have been better at AE with its structured discussion. Also I'm sure beating dead asses has to count for exercise, so win-win! —valereee ( talk) 17:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, everyone. Grateful for the friendly banter. Enjoy your Taxpayer-funded Mule. El_C 23:13, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C
Sorry to bother you here, but I think it's probably the best place to ask. This was autoarchived while two elements, a question and evidence of probably not-stale violations were still outstanding. I was hoping to ask how to restore it or otherwise keep it alive until handled? BilledMammal ( talk) 07:08, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Dear @ El C hope you're doing well. Would you mind giving your input as a third opinion in Talk:Kingdom of Commagene#Recent revert? I'm having a minor disagreement over the lede wording with @ HistoryofIran. Arguments are presented in the talk, if you have time, please take a look. Kind regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 08:55, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C. I'm asking since you've always adminned in a balanced way in this topic area while staying uninvolved in the actual disputes. Would you consider putting transgender people in sports ( history) under extended confirmed protection per the gender DS? Or at least semiprotection. This is an extremely contentious and politicized topic in the media right now, and we've just had this editor show up. I had to revert that due to its WP:BLP violations against a scientist working in this area (calling her "bad faith", and citing a blog and engaging in OR to push a narrative about her) as well as numerous violations of WP:MEDRS. This absolutely won't be the last time disruption is a problem at this article. This is no different than climate change or GMOs where scientific articles say one thing while politicized media sources and soundbites can be used to say something else. Crossroads -talk- 14:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The "Grace Under Fire" barnstar |
After following as much as I could stand of this discussion at AN, I am amazed at the good humor with which you keep tolerating the sneers and smears. I am awarding you the "Grace Under Fire" award. Also remembering the not-so-old saying, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall catch hell from both sides". MelanieN ( talk) 17:40, 3 August 2021 (UTC) |
Can you semi Prime Minister of Myanmar? ― Tartan357 Talk 06:31, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey, EL C. Hope you're well. I have filed a semi-protection request at [64]. There are other articles which are targetted by these IPs with the same narrative. [65] [66]. If you have some spare time, could you semi-protect these articles? -- Maleschreiber ( talk) 12:11, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Vanamonde ( Talk) 16:15, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your support and trust in my recent run for admin. I've had an interesting first few weeks and am learning a lot by being able to better watch (through tools) what admins do. Please call on me if you see making an error, or if you just need help. Thanks again. BusterD ( talk) 17:27, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
You can bypass pawaylling in a number of newspaper websites by either 1) clicking the browser's stop button before the page loads with some annoying "subscribe" overlay or 2) even better, read the article in the Internet Archive. Since many newspapers paywall stuff only a few days after the initial writeup, you can get the day 1 version in IA quite often. Neither is foolproof, but they are good to keep in mind. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:49, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
[67] Hahahahha! :) -- Hammersoft ( talk) 20:20, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
BTW, GW, I realize the bot archiving is fast. But if you still wish to respond, this be the space. I naturally assume that this matter is important to you, as well... El_C 17:09, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:G3 domination.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq ( talk) 02:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:G3 domination.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
I hope, you know what I’m talking about. (off Wikipedia pointless comment of mine) Sorry. - GizzyCatBella 🍁 05:21, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Contacting you as you were the admin who semi'd Wi Spa controversy under GENSEX D/s. Just requesting you add to that protection some move protection, as it was just moved w/o discussion in a very NPOV manner and think it would be best that it only be moved by admins. What do you think? ~Gwennie🐈⦅ 💬 📋⦆ 03:13, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey, El C. Hope you're well. A new account
Seemitfe (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
logs ·
filter log ·
block user ·
block log) is moving the titles of articles about medieval Albanian figures to Italian renderings which have typing errors. I can't move them back because of the technical limitation of reverting back a page to its original name The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid.
These pages are:
Gjon Muzaka moved to Giovanni Musachi (the correct Italian rendering is Musacchi),
Lekë Dushmani moved to Lek Dushman (I accidentally moved it to Lekë Dushman I tried to revert it),
Gjergj Arianiti moved to George Aryaniti. They also moved the
Gjergj Kastrioti Skënderbeu National Museum (official name) to
Museum of Skanderbeg. They've tried the same changes before
[68]
[69]. I have none of these articles in my watchlist and I wasn't aware of the changes at the time. Is it possible to restore them to the original titles before the changes?--
Maleschreiber (
talk)
10:59, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. I see you are protecting the site from IP editing by 2023, however there is a problem in both sources do not say that Miroslav Škoro sings anti-Serbian songs. It was invented and added. I hope someone fixes it, and those who invented and added it should be ashamed to lie. Thanks and Bye. 93.136.0.168 ( talk) 16:18, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
The Book of Ruth is surprisingly litle mentioned in song; though I did find this, notable for its use of ska accordion. Narky Blert ( talk) 12:14, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Would you look at my protection edits just now? Did I miss something? BusterD ( talk) 16:57, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hi, thanks for applying page protection to article Pahonia, however I have strong doubts if its level is high enough. All three users (Czalex, Kazimier Lachnovič, Hugo.arg) who aggressively attempted to deny Wikipedia:Consensus were extendedconfirmed users, therefore all of them will still be able to revert and cause edit warring. Probably there will be even more similar users in the future. So could you apply Full protection because it suits its requirements "Articles with persistent disruption from extended confirmed accounts"? This mess took place for way too long and should be solved permanently following WP:CON. -- Pofka ( talk) 17:31, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Oh, I didn't realize this symbol is allowed in wiki text... and it's not even a template. Nice :) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:10, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Sorry to waste your time there. I really did not know the appropriate venue, since it seems like the GS/DS were saying protection can be done by any admin with lots of deference to where they feel it is appropriate, but there doesn't really seem to be a venue to request it other than {{admin help}}
or RFPP. I suppose it could have gone to ArbE? But weird since that isn't usually what that board is used for. And it's even more confusing that the other templates I referenced don't have formal "
consensus required" restrictions on them like they probably should, but instead just editnotices. All in all, very confusing. But I respect your need to have a uniform requirement for RFPP, and I didn't want to waste your time more than necessary to get the answer. So thank you, and carry on with the good mopping, Cow Man. And carry on with the good humor. I will probably just request an informal editnotice that doesn't carry any binding sanctions with it, like
Template:Current consensus editnotice.--
Shibbolethink (
♔
♕)
16:03, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hello, disruptive users began attacking article Coat of arms of Lithuania. Please apply extendedusers protection to it as well. This coordinated attack is related with a recent RF decision at Pahonia. One disruptive user wrote a message to me ( HERE) and began attacking the vital Lithuanian article. Please take actions. Also, please delete all edits made after my yesterday's stable version ( this one). -- Pofka ( talk) 16:42, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
I just notice that Solavirum has recently edited in Abbas Qoli-Khans article in violation of his topic ban from the AA2 area (i think this is the third or fourth time). A historic ruler of an Azerbaijani province obviously falls under the ban area. - Kevo327 ( talk) 07:13, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
It isn't a a "get off my lawn", but a "please behave yourself when you are on my lawn" :P -- In actu (Guerillero) Parlez Moi 18:25, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
There appears to be some who question Haaretz's reliability as a source on Haredi Judaism in general. This user has not said Haaretz in general is unreliable. But reserves the right to do so in the future. 155.246.151.38 ( talk) 22:46, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hello, please apply extendedconfirmed protection to article Coat of arms of Lithuania because Belarusian nationalists keep attacking it. Now another nationalist began deleting content, so he should be blocked as well (e.g. 1, in this he modified Encyclopedia Britannica statements: 2 because he doesn't like them). The trend of this nationalist is the same as the previous ones: Lithuania is Belarus, Lithuanian coat of arms is a Belarusian symbol, etc. These nationalists should be stopped. RFC of Pahonia clearly stated that prior to 1918 there was no Belarusian symbols/state, but these nationalists keep reinserting various controversial statements. -- Pofka ( talk) 13:33, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I'm sorry to interrupt you again, but they simply do not stop. You recently blocked two newly created accounts, however now yet another newly created account was created ( Mkurski) and attempts to recreate Pahonia article (see: Draft:Pahonia coat of arms of Belarus). Can you take urgent actions against this? It is really obvious. These two users you blocked are also related: VikiVeki, Nickitki (false accusations about xenophobia in the edit summaries shows that). I believe user Kazimier Lachnovič is using sock puppetry. Can you check IPs? Though, he is probably hiding with a VPN. -- Pofka ( talk) 11:07, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: The deletion of the Pahonia article has created an anomalous situation: hundreds of years of an important aspect of the Belarusian history has been wiped out there. It was the result of a group of activist editors promoting an actualised and reductionist reading of history. In Wikipedia articles, the the Grand Duchy of Lithuania is now increasingly reduced to a modern ethnicity. The leading contemporary specialists in Belarusian and Slavonic studies - Snyder, Wilson, Plochy, McMillin - would strongly object to such views. This reductionist approach impoverishes both Lithuanians and Belarusians. Please let and encourage the Belarusian perspective to be developed on Wikipedia. Please do not assume that Belarusian editors have malicious intent. We may make mistakes, but we'd like to play fair. Please support it. Nieszczarda2 ( talk) 08:35, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi, sorry to point this out but we are witnessing a wave of Lithuanian nationalistic POV vandalism of Belarus-related articles by an organised group including User:Pofka and User:Cukrakalnis. This included the forced removal, following a fake consensus reached as a result an non-representative vote, of the article Pahonia which a Belarusian historical coat of arms and former state symbol (just as it is a Lithuanian symbol). Moreover, I am the creator of that article but for some mysterious reason I was never notified of any deletion discussion going on - until the article was removed! We see fake accusations of things like sockpuppetry, manipulation like replacing the neutral term “national liberation movement” with emotionally-charged “nationalism” in the article National emblem of Belarus, etc. People are simply being unfair and chauvinistic, doing nothing but asserting themselves at the cost of others, and this is very sad -- Czalex 12:28, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
I'll reiterate my position as stated above. I do not wish to be to go-to admin for Belarussian-Lithuanian disputes. I don't know enough about it and my talk page isn't a noticeboard to raise these concerns (unless especially urgent or egregious). Thanks for understanding, everyone. El_C 13:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
I agree that semi-protecting the article was necessary, but I wouldn't have done it for two months as you just did. A duration of one day or even just a few hours would've been sufficient enough. The vandals will soon see that it's protected and simply move on... That's how it usually works. ;-) ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 02:51, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
That's how it usually worksis kinda rubbing me the wrong way. We've both protected a lot of pages, me +8,200, you +820 (flex!), so I dunno, maybe assume that I already know how it usually works... El_C 03:39, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Greetings User:El C,
I would like to ask you, if you could Review the latest edits by this User.
Especially his continues edits on the Article Template:Foreign relations of Yugoslavia.
I have notified him twice with a warning on his TP about his mistakes, but he is ignoring them by blanking his TP immediatly.
If you have time, a Review would be appriciated.
-- InNeed95 ( talk) 08:28, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Anyone who can admit them is A-ok in my book. —valereee ( talk) 20:12, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Saw your ArbCom reply. I agree. TRM has been absolutely mellow during this Cold Feast. I think he was just a victim of the piece. I'll be happy with the outcome if BHG can grow beyond her present limitations. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:21, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Speaking of songs and non-stressful things, this is a new article that could use some citations that just popped up in my routine patrol of User:AlexNewArtBot/PolandSearchResult. Maybe you'd enjoy copyediting it? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:15, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Good morning El C. I am wondering why you have blocked Variants of SARS-CoV-2 indefinitely. I have clicked on your WP link for an explanation but it refers to editing disputes, which is not the case here. I would be grateful for your explanation. 2A00:23C6:5497:8B01:12E:D663:414B:A1FC ( talk) 08:11, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Dear El_C, I left a message earlier asking you for a third opinion in Talk:Kingdom of Commagene#Recent revert. I also used WP:THIRD, with no replies back. Please consider looking at that talk section and if you'd be kind enough, give your opinion as a third party. I can't resolve that dispute, I'm starting to think that the editor has a certain POV and uses their much higher experience as bullying tactics. They reverted my edit again without even replying in talk diff. I feel like I'm starting to repeat myself, and I can't come to a conclusion with the user. Hoping that you could help to resolve this issue. Thanks in advance. Regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 16:43, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
(idle observation) After my daughter moved away, she called one night urgently needing to know "what is the name of the song with the screamers?" That's what we call it. We prefer this version though. Schazjmd (talk) 20:20, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for sticking up for Flyer here [72] (single brackets). Disagreeing with her is fine. Doing something that would rub noses in her loss is not. Springee ( talk) 04:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much for protecting George Harrison's page, I am very happy! 9Revolution.
You asked suggestions for what evidence to look at. I think the arbitration report is starting to focus alot on Mhhossein, but this is understandable because he has made 30% of all edits at Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran, edited Iranian topics (a difficult area) for 7 years, and dealt with difficult users. I don't think Mhhossein is a perfect editor and I can see his mistakes, though I think his contribution on this topic as been, on the whole, positive.
So my two cents would be to look the evidences on Mhhossein (eg those in Vanamonde's section) and see if any patterns emerge. I tried giving evidence on him but I don't think its adequate. Sorry if my thoughts are all over the place! VR talk 18:45, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Stefka and Mhhossein have filed WP:SPIs against each other— I knew that SB launched an SPI on MH (because I commented on it at the time), but I was not aware that it was also vice versa. That submission to your evidence section says that this is so, but you've provided no, well, evidence. Can you please clarify, then, with evidence? Because WP:SPI/Stefka_Bulgaria does not exist, so I'm confused. To that: not to be a dick, but it's kinda silly of you not to link to these SPIs, but instead just link to the main WP:SPI page, for some reason (like, for what?). El_C 21:31, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
the anti-MEK camp also largely reflects the view of the theo-fascist Islamic regime that rules Iran". Yes, I've been critical of MEK, but does't mean I agree with the Iranian government or its lack of freedoms etc. In fact, you'll find that much of the criticism of MEK actually comes from Western liberal sources. VR talk 22:05, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
I want a clarification on this issue in 2019 Loksabha elections article page ,where results table are for only 542 seats and one seat held later. ECI recently updated the files and includes all seats for calculation vote share ,voters, registered electors and so on. It even published a article and atlas about 2019 loksabha election, I tried to edit as per Election commission of India's sources and files but one user reverted both my edits and references and said that delayed election should not be included.Whether it is a general or delayed election or not, primary source for election related articles in Wikipedia are the election commission of their respective countries. Even Election commission of India saying total electors for GE 2019 are 911,950,784 they reverted to 910,512,091, I even continuously arguing but that user not satisfied for Government's souce and files. Please express your views in it Nahtrav ( talk) 10:40, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
express your views in it, with it being the article talk page. Because other disputants are making use of it. So please do so and stop edit warring. El_C 11:02, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Sorry to prolong this, but do you think you could remind Nahtrav about our canvassing rules? This is not particularly neutral. Given that he's done this on-wiki, I also strongly suspect that another user was canvassed off-wiki to comment given how quickly they appeared on the RfC after Nahtrav and basically just said that they agreed with him... Cheers, Number 5 7 15:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
There are still issue of WP:1RR that was broken about week ago. Do you think it could be brought to WP:AE? -- Shrike ( talk) 15:16, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Or even requested— I know, I write like shit, no need to gloat. El_C 22:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
|
Digital Fruit Basket |
For your recent close of an ARBPIA-related ANI thread, the WMF awards you this digital fruit basket. As you know, you have a ways to go before you get one IRL, but we hope these e-grapes tide you over until then. Firefangledfeathers ( talk) 15:18, 18 August 2021 (UTC) |
Thanks for closing the discussion. I won't make any comment about the discussion itself. But if I am parsing your closing note correctly, there was an objection to the template I used? I transcluded it from one of a dozen ANI threads that use it to produce a full list of user-associated links. I wasn't suggesting that editor was a vandal; simply using a format used in any number of similar threads. And not once did I suggest the editor was a vandal. St★lwart 111 02:01, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
I see that User:Space pedant remains unregistered. I am sorely tempted (even if Interstellar Smartarse might be closer the mark). Girth Summit (blether) 15:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=1039461072#Possible_solution? . The case has been closed but I added part (minutes before closure). Adding something have do with this one twitter post and Great Highway Wikipedia. Especially when someone said "they go few rounds" on the page and ""They don't know what they're up against" "... https://twitter.com/graue/status/1427461634482597890 Centralist2021 ( talk) 22:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Centralist2021, I specialize in sanctions, just not in disputes that involve roads. The admin who protected the page also specializes in sanctions. I haven't seen anything to suggest sanctions are needed at this time, but you're free to seek a second opinion. However, I'm wary of burdening any individual admin with that by sending you their way (I feel it'd be an imposition). Good luck. El_C 03:46, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Bbb23 also stated they hated that shit, irdk. Boy do you make our work extremely tedious but I have found away around it though. Celestina007 ( talk) 00:37, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello I got a interesting topic to create an article. Is The Times Bulletin a genuine news source for the reference? Boti2481 ( talk) 00:37, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi I have fixed all issues by talking to an administrator of the Draft:Rishton Ka Manjha I need someone to move the article can you do this? Boti2481 ( talk) 04:35, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Liz. Appreciate it. El_C 08:16, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
User:Mavi Gözlü Kel who has many warnings attack other users here could you look on this, WP:NOTHERE? [73] he was blocked several times. Shadow4dark ( talk) 07:57, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The second thanks in August go to you, for help with Hebrew, and your spirits! My 12th today, DYK? I decorated, also for a birthday. Songs invite to more music, places, food and flowers. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Today: 2 interesting DYK (I think), sadly 2 who died (on top of 2 from Poland yesterday), and a concert in which Daniel Barenboim just played piano, with this wonderful orchestra of players from Israel and Palestine, conductor from Israel, - and afterwards he and the orchestra received last year's prize (pictured). -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:58, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Today: 3 DYK, including that the author dedicated a summer story to a license plate number ;) - Five rows of images added, sunflowers and butterflies continued, four rows of 15 August alone, - a rich Monteverdi day, - enjoy! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:08, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Today: Teresa Żylis-Gara, the second soprano to impress me on stage, died, - long live the memory of her beautiful singing, remembered with thanks. 28 August 2013 was a special concert day: look. After Hillbillyholiday gave me a tree. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:45, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
You are Lobby Lud and I claim my £5! Narky Blert ( talk) 19:59, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
I shot an arrow in the air,
It fell to enough, I knew not where;
But, strangely, at my journey's end,
I found it again in the neck of a friend.
(Falsely attrib. Longfellow.) Narky Blert ( talk) 23:22, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
"I shot an arrow into the air.
It hit the ground, I know not where.
You know. I loose a lot of arrows that way".
GoodDay (
talk)
02:52, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I know you warned Vaze50 on their talk page a few days ago about WP:BATTLEGROUND and WP:ASPERSIONS but Vaze has continued such behavior mostly towards DeCausa on their talk page. It seems Vaze has been give enough WP:ROPE, but has not dropped the WP:STICK and cotinues to beat a WP:DEADHORSE. [74] [75] [76] saying "Your motivation is absolutely bizarre to me", "There are only a couple of plausible reasons. 1) You think the UK is not a country (objectivity false), 2) You have a political objective to advance by removing the UK, 3) Some other reason that isn’t immediately apparent.", and probably more damnin saying "Have you noticed GoodDay that DeCause suddenly went quiet when they accidentally revealed their bias on the topic and their belief that the UK is not a country? How can anybody seriously say that this website is acting in an impartial way when a tiny number of blatantly politically motivated individuals are allowed to bully their way through? What can we do about this?". Please let me know if I am being to cautious. Regards Spy-cicle💥 Talk? 21:10, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El, could you look at Special:Contributions/2601:601:9800:76::/64? The IP resumed their disruptive edits about a day after the block was lifted. User:Alex Bakharev has blocked it twice, but the admin has only edited once in the past month. IIRC, you once asked me about this LTA user, so I figured you might still be familiar with them. Thanks. BilCat ( talk) 06:36, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello, El C. There is an open SPI case of a user Chatterjee95 whom you've blocked from mainspace following an ANI report. Kindly have a look into it. Thanks -- Ab207 ( talk) 12:08, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello El C. I hope you are well. I'm guessing this is what a pirate does when their talk page gets too long :-) Enjoy your weekend. MarnetteD| Talk 17:13, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, I'd like you to know that your initial perception of the sources was not taken as a reflection on me, so I don't regard your apology as necessary at all. Nonetheless, I am happy to accept the apology. Onetwothreeip ( talk) 02:40, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
The kickboxing result for Amansio Paraschiv vs. Lofogo Sarour was overturned. The judges first decided 29-28, 29-29 and 29-29, meaning majority draw. After it was overturned to a UD (unanimous decision) for Paraschiv. And I do have two sources saying this: 1. KickboxingZ 2. Official Facebook of the promotion. The IP is ignoring them. So thanks! What I need is some weeks of protection. .karellian-24 ( talk) 17:12, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El. Forgive me for intruding in this superbly curated section of your talk page, but although I commented earlier this year with a suggestion, I have felt that this section is too personal to you to add stuff to it. It is most enjoyable, and I return here frequently to dip in and haven't found anything not to my taste. Following a lost four hours on one occasion, I have limited myself to two links per day since then. Basically, I wanted to thank you for this and if I may be so bold, to suggest something for you to sample. (For the record, the second sax from the left of your latest link has played as a guest artist with my suggestion), which is, The San Andreu Jazz band. link to leaders Youtube page from a school for performing arts in Barcelona. There is approximatly 15 years worth of video posted by the Professor of the school, Bass and Sax and Conductor Joan Chamorro. I could go on and on and on, but I'll request you to take a look, and find out for yourself, if you have not come across them. Let me know what you think. Best wishes - Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 11:56, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for your block the page Oromia. That good place for dispute resolution, Assuming good faith, I want to request edit in order to add Sheger at the infobox and lead section from [77] [78] [79]. Thanks! The Supermind ( talk) 13:38, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I see you removed an edit summary on the page Lacewood Productions however I think a few more edit summaries will need to be removed for the same reason as the first. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor ( talk) 19:20, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. The disruption at this redirect ( Bigg Boss (Hindi Season 15)) has not stopped even after it being protected. I guess GenuineEditsOnly 2005 should be blocked because they've been warned enough and they continue doing disruption. I'd leave the decision to you because you protected the redirect.....─ The Aafī (talk) 11:12, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Dear @ El C: Thank you for protecting the page of Agra-Lucknow Expressway. Kindly help do the same for Purvanchal Expressway also. I am too working since long to make Wikipedia a nice, informative platform. Regards. Aakash Singh India ( talk) 12:55, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hi, sorry to disturb you again, but they simply don't stop and yet again wants to deny Wikipedia:Consensus. Please take urgent actions against Pahonia (disambiguation). The trend is the same as they claim that one of the historical names of the Lithuanian coat of arms is an exclusively Belarusian symbol (this disambiguation page is nothing else than a shortened version of Pahonia). It was already denied at Wikipedia:Consensus. -- Pofka ( talk) 14:33, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: They implement suggestion B (make disambiguation page) of RFC ( link to RFC once again), despite the fact that the decision was suggestion A (make redirect page). Please delete Pahonia (disambiguation). -- Pofka ( talk) 15:04, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor |
Not the biggest fan of the ol' barnstar, but the El_C brand of crazy keeps AN/I from being a complete cluster. I guess keep it up? ~ TNT (she/they • talk) 14:38, 24 August 2021 (UTC) |
Hello El_C, a relative new account, TSKEnjoyer12 (1 month old creation), have been reverting and errasing information from RS from military equiptement related articles. Multiple times The user reverts content using false arguments in the edit sumary section. Always pushing for a BIASED POV. He have been warned many times, but he errases the warnings, but keep pushing his POV. Mr.User200 ( talk) 18:32, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello El C! I'm a bit confused: reading
WP:ARBHORN, this should have ended around on 9 March, yet I see that you added a new editing restriction on an editor on 4 March (
here) which is
still there now.
EdJohnston also warned the editor for violating the editing restriction on 23 March
[80], which is well after the DS should have ended. Is this a mistake? Because if the editing restriction still stands, the user has been violating it massively. This can be seen at a glance by looking at their recent contribs
[81]
[82]
[83]
[84]
[85] (full disclosure: one of these reverts undid a number of edits by me); they recently even got into a
edit war and 3RR violation on a ARBHORN-related article. Of course, none of this matters if the editing restriction should actually have been retracted. Note recent warnings on their talk page though
[86]
[87]
[88]
[89]
[90]. Should I take this to
WP:AE? Thanks for your attention!
☿
Apaugasma (
talk
☉)
21:29, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
One editor is pushing his old "We don't know who Australia's head of state" BS, again. Another is trying to overturn an RFC result, concerning political offices in infoboxes of bios. A group of editors are trying to control what we can & can't have on our user pages. Is 2021 the year that Wikipedia goes nuts? or is it just me. GoodDay ( talk) 03:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
I notice that you were recently outed by an unimpeachable source as a CIA pig. That being the case, you might enjoy this rabbit hole (do you get that one?) of information and entertainment. JoJo Anthrax ( talk) 17:06, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
AGF clowncar! |
I keep feeling like a huge curmudgeon who always assumes the worst of other editors (especially new accounts editing articles on YouTubers), so the "AGF clowncar" comment made me chuckle. In a sinister creepy-clown way, naturally. Ahahaha. Fact is, this morning I almost posted a diatribe to the Teahouse against a completely innocuous comment that wasn't even directed at me, and that's why I thought I'd check if there was anything in the templated message that just rubbed the editor the wrong way. bonadea contributions talk 19:31, 25 August 2021 (UTC) |
Hi El C, the recent kerfluffle with Special:Contributions/Johnpacklambert illustrates a major hole within Wikipedia's ANI system: The lack of advocates. Often, otherwise competent editors find themselves in situations where they become so overwhelmed that they cannot react objectively. This is especially true for editors on the autism spectrum, but certainly not limited to them. I've been in such situations on Wikipedia myself, and felt extremely overwhelmed. I'm not sure what the solution is, or if there even is one. However, I've never seen this issue addressed, and, given the WMF's sensitivity to people with disorders, this may need to be addressed in some way. BilCat ( talk) 20:19, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I have decided to take on this less than trivial unblock request.
I want to start by saying that I believe the block was correct. While indefinite you have given them a path back by pointing out the need for assurances that they recognize the issue and will not repeat it.
Their rather lengthy unblock request seems to admit fault and make such assurances. That being said I believe any unblock should be conditional. I want to discuss with you how you feel about a conditional unblock and what sort of conditions may be appropriate.
I have read through the ANI thread and I see a few suggestions ranging from topic bans, 1RR restrictions, and little tolerance for future similar issues. What do you think would be a good set of conditions to warrant unblocking?
I am also not assuming you take their current statement as sufficient, if there are any deficiencies that need to be addressed please let me know. Ultimately I would like to see a way to let this editor back in a way that will not harm the community. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 01:15, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
Hoping this doesn't cause you too much drama - I do regret being very clear with the whole "if anyone objects I'll revert" thing, but then I didn't really expect anyone to object to a bit of human decency... Ho hum ~ TNT (she/they • talk) 03:40, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Dear El C, firstly, wanted to say thank you for your recent mediation in Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement.
I had a question if you don't mind: Currently, there is a content dispute in Armenian–Tatar massacres of 1905–1907. The user WimpyDood refuses to revert themself and restore stable edit until consensus is reached on talk, see history of edits. I explained them multiple times about wikipedia guidelines and asked to revert to the stable edit per WP:ONUS, WP:CONSENSUS, but, A) they refuse and throw baseless accusations at me, B) they don't reply to my latest messages pinging them and asking the same, see Talk:#Latest addition.
I'm having a lot of difficulties interacting with the user. I'll immensely appreciate if you could intervene. Many thanks in advance. Regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 16:36, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
El C, LouisAragon, thank you for your input and help. I'll restore the stable version of the article until consensus is achieved on talk over the disputed content, as the user WimpyDood still hasn't responded to my pings to self revert themselves and restore the stable edit.
Dear El C, I had one more question just to clarify things and to confirm my understanding of relevant guidelines: If a user added new content to an article, and it got reverted later on, is it correct for subsequent editors to restore said disputed content [1], [2] without achieving consensus on talk?
My understanding is that it's not correct, and I tried my best to explain this (with relevant guidelines including) to WimpyDood [3], who kept reverting and restoring disputed content. I would very much appreciate your thoughts regarding this, so if I'm in the wrong as WimpyDood claims in their next message to me (this isn't the first time from them) [4], I'll know better and act accordingly in the future. Best regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 13:02, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi. After taking some time to cool off, I'd like to withdraw my AE request concerning GoodDay. After a deluge of WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT comments in the original RfC, I felt like the goal was to replicate that at AN, but with a clearer head, I see that there is insufficient evidence to suggest that. ― Tartan357 Talk 20:45, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
All this fighting is giving me serious WP:WIKISTRESS. I'm gonna go work on some unloved articles for a while. ― Tartan357 Talk 20:59, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
An expert on the now-closed Yahoo! Answers once said that someone - possibly Dave Van Ronk - had seen an old photo of a women's prison in New Orleans which had a carving of a rising sun above the grim stone doorway. That makes a lot of sense to me. Link. Narky Blert ( talk) 22:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C,
Would you consider EC protecting Causes of transsexuality under the gender DS? This is an extremely politically contentious topic and is a disruption magnet. ( history) Aside from IPs and low-level stuff, an editor who is autoconfirmed but not extended confirmed recently appeared and, even after I reverted them the first time saying in an edit summary to use only WP:MEDRS review articles, they added a bunch of primary sources as well as three major BLP violations, here (the book contains no such relationships whatsoever) and here and here claiming that Ray Blanchard wrote an essay written by someone else.
Thanks for considering. Crossroads -talk- 23:41, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Pinging you next--I've already dropped notes at several noticeboards, and with Ohnoitsjamie. Cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 01:30, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello,
I was trying to update the article 2021 Canadian federal election regarding the NDP's platform policies on various topics, but the article is locked. Can you enable permission to update? - Matticus333 ( talk) 03:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello, El C. Does 2022 New York gubernatorial election, fall under the 1RR rule? GoodDay ( talk) 05:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Just wanted to say your comment “I’m seeing double over here four Cristiano ronaldos” made me laugh. Thanks RossButsy ( talk) 11:10, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey El C, I warmly greet you and hope you're good. I've been noticing repeated vandalism on Sin Boy [94] [95] [96] [97] [98] and I therefore believe semi-protecting the article could be necessary. Thank you in advance.-- Lorik17 ( talk) 11:39, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hi, yet another sock puppet of the same user is performing disruptive editing: Gedzimin. Draft:Pahonia(emblem) is the same as Draft:Pahonia coat of arms of Belarus you recently deleted. This is obviously the same disruptive person. Please take urgent actions against him. -- Pofka ( talk) 19:54, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey El_C, any possibility of a page protection here [99]. I have a feeling it could get really bad. Thanks, Khirurg ( talk) 20:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
By some totally crazy coincidence (MUST be a coincidence), Ktrimi came out of nowhere to rv within a minute of me posting here [100]. This is what we have to deal with in these articles. Khirurg ( talk) 20:31, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for this. Even if I may dislike with the outcome, I believe you have fairly assessed the lack of consensus. However, I do have one favor to ask: Is there any way you could restore the essay's talk page, since the user essay will be kept? I think it adds important context to the community's thoughts on the essay. Let me know if I should file a formal WP:REFUND instead. Thank you.— Shibbolethink ( ♔ ♕) 14:19, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
I just commented at AN/I, but I only now just noticed you blocked 109.79. I think this was a misunderstanding because from what I can tell since 109.79 is actually an experienced user (not a sockpuppet) who had a pretty legitimate reason for doing what they did (certainly weren't ever warned against it at least). I really don't think blocking them was the right call here. – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 17:23, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
The Boomtown Rats were a punk band of the second rank, who'd written a couple of good tunes but had a rep for TTH. Then one day in 1985, with Sir Bob Geldof (as he then wasn't) running on fumes and adrenaline, they did this - and jammed the entire BT phone network for over two hours.
Few popular musicians understand the power of silence. Keith Moon was another.
(I'd bet my life savings Geldof got his K on the recommendation of Brenda or someone in her household - Thatcher couldn't stand him, he called her out.) Narky Blert ( talk) 17:36, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
For taking on difficult tasks that need to be done I award you the Admin Barnstar. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 23:07, 29 August 2021 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Special Barnstar |
For being “that sort of admin” there are a bunch of you though, but you popped in my head first. I have always been intrigued by men and women of power who aren’t stiff but jovial and act as though they aren’t powerful but command great authority and power it’s hard to explain but I hope you get what I’m trying to say. Furthermore for being an admin who is unafraid or unfazed in the face of tough decisions. Celestina007 ( talk) 23:51, 29 August 2021 (UTC) |
Kolkata Downgrade the protection to semi because of page stablity.. Thanks.– ItsSkV08 ( talk) 08:40, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Is this you?-- Ymblanter ( talk) 15:53, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. Some IP hopper (from Turkish Cyprus) has appeared out of nowhere and is disrupting the latest articles I have edited. [103] [104] -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 19:57, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
I saw that you were the administrator that protected User:Johnpacklambert's talk page; would you be willing to look at the user page as well? Brownugget ( talk · contribs) is an account created today that seems to be created with the sole purpose of messing with JPL and made this edit to his user page. - Aoidh ( talk) 22:54, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
I was not aware of the edit notice, in hindsight that makes a lot of sense. First time doing a page restriction under DS. Thank you. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 23:01, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
The user Aydin mirza keeps casting aspersions in Talk:Kapan#Edition and sources. Their latest reply is a good example [108]. They seem to be a WP:SPA account [109], and have a history of disruptive and POV style edits in AA area. They also re-revert every time their disruptive edits are reverted [110], [111], despite all the notices in their talk page. Maybe you could take a look, dear El C. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 13:37, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
BilCat ( talk) 00:25, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Friend in hospital needs help. Possibly serious, but not life threatening. Might be resolved quickly enough, but if I vanish for a few days, that'd be the reason.
Sorry in advance if I miss your comment here, there's been like 50 edits to my talk page in the last 2 days alone, which is really par for the course. Please note that, in general, there's no harm in placing a note at the bottom here just to check if maybe I overlooked your comment. That said, there are a few (very few) threads/comments I purposefully do not reply to for whatever reason, so, I dunno, use your discretion there I suppose (ask yourself: what would Darth Tyrannus do?).
Thanks everyone and best wishes, El_C 17:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
You changed edit prot here but that also set the temporary move prot to indef. Can you remove the move prot or lower it to autoconfirmed to match edit? ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 00:18, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Dear El_C, hope you're doing well. As the title says, user Verman1 edit wars and later adds complete WP:OR with POV modifications in Nagorno-Karabakh conflict: Revision history. As seen from the history, I notified them numerous times about their unsourced additions, now they're adding the same with a source that doesn't support their claims (and which after checking, I told them [112]). They re-reverted me yet again without an explanation (also breaking 1RR if it applies) [113]. Clear breach of WP:OR, WP:EW and WP:DE. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 13:20, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
98.113.137.35 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Hi El C
An IP has recently emerged, adding personal commentary and removing sourced information [114] [115] [116]
A interesting thing is that the edit he did here [117], which is basically a restoration of a previous banned users edit [118], both of whom have the same rather rude behaviour [119] [120] [121]. This guy deffo seems to know me (or well, he think he does). -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 19:16, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) @ HistoryofIran: maybe I can help. An IP range is like a net you throw over a bunch of IPs that are given out to users connecting to the same network, which is often determined by being geographically close to each other. The larger the net you throw, the more chance there is that you will 'catch' more than one user receiving IPs within that range.
So if we block an IP range, we want to make sure that the net is not too big: we want to block the disruptive user, but we might not want to block their brilliant neighbour who happens to sit in the same IP range. The way to do this is to look for the IP range that does include all the disruptive IPs, but not any (or too many) others.
For example, the smallest IP range in this case is 98.113.137.35/32 (you can reach this by going to an IP's contribs and manually adding "/32" to the URL), which doesn't include 98.113.137.113. The largest possible IP range, 98.113.137.35/16 (the smaller the number after the /, the larger the range), does include it, but is of course much too large. The fastest way to find the smallest range that includes it is to first check the one in the middle between 16 and 32, 98.113.137.35/24, which still includes it, then again the middle between 24 and 32, 98.113.137.35/28, which doesn't include it anymore because it is too small, and so work your way to 98.113.137.35/25, which is the smallest IP range that contains both disruptive IPs.
The next thing to do is to check whether any of the other IP's caught up in the range can be safely assumed to belong to the same disruptive user. If not, blocking that range will also block the non-disruptive and potentially brilliant users behind the other IPs. Whether that 'collateral damage' is worth it, is something El C doubtlessly will be able to judge. ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 00:08, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, extra eyes on this will be appreciated--I don't want to spend the late night reverting and repeating, then going to a noticeboard. Thanks and cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 02:56, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
To start off, if this is too recent for you to wish to discuss, I can understand that and will happily go crawl back under my rock.
But in light of recent events, it's interesting to me to consider my recent proposal in light of recent events. Now it's a different situation to be sure, but I wonder, setting aside the 24 hour arbitrary time limit a second, I wonder if discussions (between blocker/unblocker/potential blocker/various editors/community/etc.) might have been more fruitful somehow. This was a mess, but such situations often are.
I'm wondering what we (as editors, as admins, as part of a community) could do better here.
And in thinking about it, I guess I was wondering what your thoughts were, not so much necessarily on this specific situation, but situations in general. - jc37 06:18, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
I really do not care much about what that particular editor does, but out of curiosity. Is an editor who is topic banned from the Balkans allowed to edit articles that mention Romania, Serbia and Croatia [127]? Ktrimi991 ( talk) 17:51, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello, El_C, User:Karak1lc1k left me a message at my talk page, dont know what to say, could something be made. For example to protect my talk page or indicating him that talk pages are not Forums. I'm not Iraqi or Belgian but dont believe that type of opinions should be allowed, because of WP:FORUM and WP:CIV. By the way that user was blocked in the past for disruptive edits and turning talk pages in forums 1, 2, 3. Mr.User200 ( talk) 18:01, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Hey El_C, hope you are doing well (and your friend who was in a hospital too). Just to let you know, this RfC i opened more than a month ago has not gained any contribution, however, so far two other editors have already said that the current version is not legit, Visioncurve and Kansas Bear. Thoughts ?---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 20:19, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
cheers El C, wondered if you can help here- an editor has added this (Procurement) table which mostly speculative content, and a mess to read - further the content is already covered Royal Malaysian Air Force page. I've removed & noted here to no avail (twice wanna avoid an edit war)- any help would be appreciated - Thanks FOX 52 talk! 05:14, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
that's not the proper use of a table WP:WHENTABLE -further already covered in the "Present development": (RMAF page)( diff) — that's actually not the best approach for dealing with someone who has only been here for a couple of months. It would have been better to explain in simple terms on the article talk page what all that means, then add a link to it at the end of the original edit summary. Otherwise, it sort of comes across as wiki alphabet soup bombardment of a new'ish editor. And, in general, communicating through edit summaries is rarely enough for content disputes. HTH! El_C 10:09, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
Can you please renew the protection on 2021 Burmese protests? ― Tartan357 Talk 08:34, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
On a related note: I'm in agreement with @ Tartan357: that the current prime minister of Myanmar, is the 12th prime minister. I'm quite familiar with the editor (Mewulwe), who has a habit of 'deleting' numberings from random office holder infoboxes, with a tendency to edit-war over it. Kelvin Goertzen, is the latest example. GoodDay ( talk) 17:28, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
You might take a look at Topal Osman, there has been an edit war on-going since 10:39, 17 July 2021, when user:Alexander Leone started removing referenced. [130] -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 20:28, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
I definitely used to ECP templates before it was "approved", since the option was there in the software and it made sense to me, but then someone (don't remember who) decided to make a big deal about all the templates that were ECP protected out of process and insisted that I reverse a bunch of them. Then a couple years go by and we turn around and approve it "formally" or whatever, and now folks want to take admins to task for using template protection "when ECP would suffice", even for things that happened years ago. I do love a bureaucracy. Ivanvector ( Talk/ Edits) 01:41, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello El C, this article claims that Iran and Sudan and Ba'athist Iraq are allied with Egyptian Islamic Jihad and I noticed that so many people are angry about it and keep removing it from the lead. I added it again after somebody removed it, but I'm not sure if I shall keep it or remove it. So I decided to ask an administrator to tell me what to do. رايكر ( talk) 08:44, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C, the user whome you have blocked User:Sushameendra Simha.Vaddigiri has created another account User:Sushameendra Simha.V and started doing the same thing again. - MRRaja001 ( talk) 11:34, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
The user seems to be a sockpuppet/meatpuppet [131] judging by their knowledge (for a 100 edit account) and mostly POV focused edits in AA area and in Turkish articles. They have been reported in an SPI previously [132]. They seem to be quite knowledgeable about guidelines, examples: Neutrality, consensus. [133] (note below 20 edits at that time), and others [134], [135]. What do you think, El C? I have very limited experience with sockpuppets/meatpuppets, so wanted to ask for advice. Many thanks in advance. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 01:02, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Hey El! I came across this draft tagged with WP:G4 which I declined because the discussion it linked was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason J. Hogg (2nd nomination) which was a speedy by you. But then there is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason J. Hogg which had Keeps. So, the speedy would seem to be an error if the first AFD was also about the same topic. In that case, the proper course would seem to be to restore the article as it was "no consensused" in the first discussion and start another AFD? Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:25, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Jason Jude Hogg is the Executive Vice President of Preferred Dynamix, a business that is part of Rent-A-Center.
I am here regarding the topic of deletion of "Zakarid Armenia" due to many reverts, I've lost the huge wall of texts and arguments that I had which you accidentally reverted. So, if I may ask, could you please do it yourself or, at least copy the text I've written and paste it here so I re-do it? SonofJacob ( talk) 15:53, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Nicoljaus, indef topic ban and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.
Thanks,-- Nicoljaus ( talk) 10:54, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
In the open Iranian politics arbitration case, the proposed decision has now been posted. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. You were notified as you made comments in the case request. For the Arbitration Committee, Moneytrees🏝️ Talk/ CCI guide 01:49, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Arbcom can never take our love! [161] Izno ( talk) 03:05, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Maybe I shouldn't try to read WP:ANI from a phone, but I was scanning through it and saw Concerns About Softlavender by Butterslipper, and saw your close stating that a CBAN had been imposed, and I thought that it couldn't possibly mean what it appeared to mean. I knew that it had to mean that the Original Poster had been banned. But the subsequent subthread to that effect wasn't in view. I figured that it really meant that Butterslipper had thrown the boomerang at a kangaroo that wasn't there. So, in this case, the close wasn't self-explanatory unless one scanned way down. Just adding that it was the OP would have helped. Oh well. Robert McClenon ( talk) 19:26, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Unrelated-related tidings of-the-now: just got a scam phone call from India (and you know I answer all of em!) about how I'm gonna get super-awwested. The "officer" asked for my name, so naturally I said it was "Ham Alvis." Him: okay, Mr. Ham. Me: No, Ham is my first name, my last name is Alvis. Him: okay, Mr. Alvis, let me transfer you to one of our agents. But sadly, I didn't reach the 2nd tier. They might have just google'd the name. So, no joy. Or, partial joy only. El_C 17:18, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello, since the Kurdish-related content on the Germiyanids page has been subject to persistent disruption for a period of two weeks by Turkish nationalist editors wanting to remove or minimize anything Kurdish-related from the article, and some suspected sockpuppets (still waiting investigation) who persistently keep removing a specific and sourced piece of the content about the religious Yezidi background of the dynasty's Kurdish component, I've come to request an extended confirmed protection for the page. KurdeEzidi ( talk) 14:59, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your help, have a good day. KurdeEzidi ( talk) 16:22, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
I came across some allegations on the Rex Wilson article, and removed them as they were unsourced and of a serious nature. This isn't a BLP issue, as he's been dead for nearly 100 years.
Looking into the details the allegations were added
back in 2017, but went unnoticed until a different IP editor removed them in
February of this year. That was reversed [
in April, which I reverted
in August. Once again come September the details were
added back, and again
I reverted.
I feel it likely the person adding and re-adding the details is the same person, they don't appear inclined to discuss the matter, and each time it's added by a different IP months apart.
So here's where I need advise. I can't report the IP as they an never the same, but asking for page protection seems pointless given the delays between each edit. However I'm basically in a extremely slow edit war, and every option seems unhelpful. Given the nature of the allegation it doesn't seem ideal to just let the matter go. If this was a BLP issue I would have asked for the revision to be revdel'd.
I've tried finding any evidence of the allegation or details of George Edward Wilson's (he's real name) later life, but without any success. Apart from the BFI link the only offer source I've found online is a death notice in a local newspaper archive that is likely related, but gives no more details. Rex certainly appears notable have directed multiple films, but due to the amount of time that has past it's very difficult to find anything.
Any advise on how I should proceed?
92.5.2.97 (
talk)
22:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
I know it's the wrong reference, but I always see Heston pretending to be dead on horseback when I see you name.
Hello there comrade. I cannot help but notice this remark you made in an edit summary for
Gina Carano: this thing again? Which is to say: fire-and-forget graffiti by supporters and detractors alike continues unabated
. This is an inaccurate assessment, and borders on bothsidesism. There is no ongoing back and forth between two sides, one being Gina Carano's supporters, and the other being her detractors. There are only supporters, who are members of a known far-right hate group that calls itself "The Fandom Menace", trying to vandalize the article and remove important information related to the social media controversy that led to her ousting from lucasfilm, in an attempt to whitewash her. There is no "other side" of "detractors", just regular contributors trying to fix the damage. Just thought you might want to know.
46.97.170.112 (
talk)
09:45, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
InNeed95 doesnt learn nothing, he still vandalizing, edit warring and POV pushing, per this Special:Contributions/InNeed95 your comment was indeed useless to InNeed95, he persists violating wiki rules and stalking other users... Aquinasthomes1 ( talk) 11:09, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Just wanted to shoot you a quick thanks. I see you doing admin work all over the place, and generally trying to keep spirits high and cut down on unnecessary drama when you can. Obviously, not everyone appreciates your sense of humor, but at least you're trying to add some levity. Anyway, know that people you don't really interact with see and appreciate what you do. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 20:29, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St3kjsmOQQE Narky Blert ( talk) 22:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, sorry to bother you. Can you have a look at this report regarding disruptive IPs. Thanks a lot. — Paper9oll ( 🔔 • 📝) 12:56, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Greetings,
Since August ending are in communication ( your comment @ my talk page) about #En masse public molestation and sexual violence against women.
In spite of reasonable effort from my side that includes communicating with content deleting IP's talk pages as well as related project talk pages, and couple of user talk pages from article history there is no response from content deletionist side.
One response which I received on my talk page supports encyclopedic notability of the incidence, but had some other query which has been answered by me.
Since it is almost 3 weeks there is no communication from deletion side I suppose Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle supported by semi protection might lead to the discussion, please do suggest.
Thanks and warm regards
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 12:40, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for protecting the page. There’s been a slow edit war on that for about a year. Something more than a 4 day lock is probably needed…but I don’t know what. DeCausa ( talk) 13:24, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
I’m not sure why the two camps get so upset about it. It may be connected with some sort of local modern POV that I’ve never been able to fathom or it may be just the normal WP pedantry-syndrome— it can be two things! Regards, El_C 14:22, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Well, this would probably require going a fair bit back in time. See [179] for a compilation of diffs from September last year. I have my doubts that this has been a perpetual edit-war, based on the following evidence:
Homeopathic A&E. Narky Blert ( talk) 20:52, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. Firstly, hope you aren't too bothered by this from yesterday. I was so confused when I read that, only thing that came to my mind was this (especially when I later took a look at their page and previous conversation with you).
Anyhow, my good friend SonofJacob was back. They started to edit-war (again) in Zakarid Armenia with an uninvolved user over their AfD result, who (rightfully) closed the AfD as speedy keep. Here are the diffs, it's quite funny actually (maybe sad who knows): [192], [193], [194].
Here comes the best part tho: When they finally reached the 3rd revert, they created another account to cirumvent yet another 3RR breach, see user Mukvani16 ( talk · contribs) and their glorious two edits: [195], [196].
It was such an obvious WP:DUCK that the AfD closer themself opened an SPI investigation/SonofJacob. Finally, my question is, why was the SPI closed exactly? It had so many red flags and was a very obvious WP:DUCK case, and as you can see from the AfD, it isn't only my opinion. I asked Callanecc to kindly explain and maybe consider reopening, and showed them the previous issues with SonofJacob. I haven't got a reply to my latest message (understandably, it's weekends), so I hoped you could shed some light. Thanks in advance and best regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 23:15, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. I noticed that you reverted Sjalel per WP:ARBPIA4 on Jul 13, 2020 regarding the Mandaeans article. The user appears to be making the same type of edits now for Mandaeism and also citing articles, but changing their meaning as they did in Mandaeism on Sep 16, 2021. I tried to change one such edit. Are these types of edits allowed? Thanks Mcvti ( talk) 23:37, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
As info I've applied a couple of wide range blocks that may help with this LTA. Edit: At least for a bit. I looked further back on Corrin now and see how bad this one has been. -- ferret ( talk) 13:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Can you protect the National Democratic Party of Germany page? Repeated disruption (maybe even considered vandalism) by an IP user [199]. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 15:53, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Probably happened at the same time you protected it, so he just sneaked through. I'm sure it ends now, thanks. Ifnord ( talk) 21:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for intervening on Godzilla vs Kong. However, the person that was edit warring left this ( 1) and this ( 2) on my talk page. He could get temporarily banned for these, right? Armegon ( talk) 21:52, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thanks for dealing with the Dhar Mann salt issue. Have a great day! snood1205( Say Hi! (talk)) 23:15, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
If user:Idris Munaf Shaikh2 agrees, would you consider moving the List of Indian battles to their sandbox for them? It is in dire need of references, proper linking(to battles instead of people, places, or things), and overall verification.
Once it is moved can the current version be deleted or will that require a more complicated resolution? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 15:49, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
My sincerest thanks to both of you! -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 17:01, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
The amendment request Amendment request: Nicoljaus, indef topic ban, has been declined by the Committee. You can review the closed amendement request here. For the Arbitration Committee, firefly ( t · c ) 12:00, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Really don't think that article should be E/C'd, yes he was a major figure in the A/I conflict, but he was so much more than that and the article covers wayyyyyy more than Israel related things. Think that should fall under the partially related part of things. nableezy - 15:24, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Lift Him Up. Bonus marks if you know what instrument he played without looking it up. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:52, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
I was reminded by someone with a better memory than my own that my white pet rabbit's name was actually Mister Whitey, because... respectable. El_C 16:38, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for protecting Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, (I requested it after noticing significant amounts of disruptive edits relating to massive fan cruft, and not the kind TV Tropes would like) but it seems that didn't do jack. Our disruptive editor seems to go right through the autoconfirmed wall. I just noticed that someone credited DHX Media (turns out they didn't get the memo it's actually called WildBrain now) for the series. Also, producers Sarah Wall and Kirsten Newlands have been added onto Dee Bradley Baker (Boo Boo Chicken and Coco the Monkey) and Nika Futterman's (the singing lock from season 4, episode 20, "Mickey's Monster Musical") credits respectively. I really don't wanna start an edit war. That would ruin my good standing.
Namethatisnotinuse Namethatisnotinuse ( talk) 22:20, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
You're not dumb, you're a genius. Thank you for your edits. Also, Hey. Lostfan333 ( talk) 22:45, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Nice Lostfan333 ( talk) 00:21, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I saw you fully protected this page a week ago because of disruption caused by changing birth place. But unfortunately the unconfirmed or IP accounts continue to vandalize the article by adding wrong information. Can you please see this problem. Thankyou. 🌌Zoglophie🌌 14:20, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Omas gegen Rechts - enjoy strong women! I thought of Yoninah on the first day of Rosh Hashanah. I hope you could help your friend. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:41, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
?? - today: the day of bold red and black, for Dante who died 700 years ago, and Peter Fleischmann who died recently, leaving us films full of vision. Dante: just heard Inferno, imagined by a woman, the main character both speaking and singing with an inner 4-part voice! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:32, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Today: a woman in red (back to the beginning of the thread), two who died under "in memoriam" and LouisAlain missed - my first editnotice read: "Every editor is a human being" which is quoted from a comment by Geometry guy in a 2012 discussion on WP:AN. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:30, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
lies about machine translations. Huh, that's a new one for me. Weird. El_C 17:57, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Pearly Brown, possibly the last of the blind singing preachers. Docu.
Britiana isn't a thing, but I'm minded to give you a couple of examples. Narky Blert ( talk) 18:32, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
You issued this IP their second block not that long ago. [200] They are still at it, it seems. [201]- [202] - LouisAragon ( talk) 12:16, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Ever look around Wikipedia, see the depth of so much nonsense and wonder if your are wasting your time trying to push back on the sea? - jc37 17:01, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
You blocked User:Pritam kumar roni das for lack of communication and copyright infringement is back and engaged in sockpuppetry. The new accounts are
Thanks. 42.105.4.65 ( talk) 17:33, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi El, can you please move North American A-36 Apache to North American A-36? The move discussion has been closed as "Move", but the article is still move-protected. Thanks. BilCat ( talk) 20:12, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Bored nationalist or monarchist has pov’d this. Given Margaret was a seven year old, can you semi or indef? Thanks awfully. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.150.39.166 ( talk • contribs)
I think that 10 days was probably a bit excessive; 1-3 days probably would have been enough since the page now isn't as heavily edited. Also, didn't see your comment until now! Jeuno ( talk) 23:02, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
You are banned indefinitely from editing or discussing anything to do with the WP:AA2 topic area, including anything to do with the Armenian genocide, broadly construed
Turkish War of Independence is related to the Armenian Genocide. Although DriedGrape's sanction was broadly construed, they engaged in a discussion in this topic area. I think this is a violation of their topic ban. Best regards.-- V. E. ( talk) 16:38, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has authorized uninvolved administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on users who edit pages related to Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, including this article.(taken from the talk page of the article)-- V. E. ( talk) 16:49, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
I just checked the source and doesn't having a big chunk of the first section after the lead, that being Historiography here, constist of a single source, that one being a recent interview with a single historian on an obscure news site, make it undue and even fringe? Especially when in the exact same source, the interviewee admits their field of expertise is not the ethnic cleansings that took place during the era? Even the interviewer doesn't seem reliable as the entire interview has loaded questions, claiming TWoİ had an İslamist purpose.Doesn't ethnic cleansing during and historiography of the Turkish War of Independence fall under their topic ban?-- V. E. ( talk) 16:59, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
(
talk page watcher) the article falls directly under
WikiProject Armenia, and has extensive mention of the Armenian genocide as well. From the lead:
Simultaneously, the Turkish nationalist movement carried out massacres and deportations in order to eliminate native Christian populations—a continuation of the Armenian genocide and other ethnic cleansing operations during World War I.
Both fall under their
broadly tban.
ZaniGiovanni (
talk)
17:19, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
My talk page contributions were not even remotely related to the topics I have been sanctioned from. DriedGrape ( talk) 17:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Until it is demonstrated that the comments in question touch on AA2 in a direct way, this may just be skirting the limits of the ban, which while isn't recommended, isn't expressly prohibited, either. El_C 17:33, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Cleoma Breaux Falcon - " Hand Me Down My Walking Cane". Narky Blert ( talk) 18:54, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Hey, El C. Hope you're well. I have filed a new SPI about an account. Can you please take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Haldir Marchwarden?-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 22:41, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
if so, then could you link it and I'll fill in the details and throw one your way for the magnificent pun in
Anyway, anyone, like yours truly, not intimately familiar with the UK Labour party's anti-semitic -related (expressly so) expulsions and background, is going to be left (-) scratching their heads here, I suspect. Nishidani ( talk) 09:14, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I just thought I'd mention that your intended indefinite block is pretty definite. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 10:40, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Please consider making editing to Jennifer Homendy available to verified accounts as the vandalism and accusations are coming from non-account editors who appear to be incited by Elon Musk. Thank you. QRep2020 ( talk) 14:13, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Can you please renew the protection on Vice-President of Myanmar? ― Tartan357 Talk 00:24, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
LingThukhaShwe ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has logged in to repeat their disruptive edits: [208], [209], [210], [211], [212]. Note in the first diff that they cited the same bogus BBC source as the IP did. The source does not at all support their claim that the deposed VP is still in power, only that he is under house arrest rather than being in prison. ― Tartan357 Talk 04:03, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Unpleasant distraction. El_C 12:28, 30 September 2021 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Hey El C, hope you're doing well. Could you please take a look at this] discussion? This is the first time in my Wikipedia editing that I felt like I'm being bullied by more experienced editors. And I noticed you're familiar with one of the editors, so if it isn't hard for you, please have a look at that discussion. With best, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 00:46, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
...When I interact with you, I get the feeling that this is someone who has edited Wikipedia before[213]
Oh really, you get that feeling. Are you suggesting I'm a sockpuppet or something? Well, here's my suggestion: Since you have no problem in expressing your baseless feelings about me, I'll voluntarily choose to undergo an SPI investigation (since no Clerk would even endorse it if you felt to try). Pick any editor(s) you want, I really don't give a damn. One caveat, tho: when the SPI fails (and it will), you have to apologize to me publicly on my talk page for your baseless feeling and assumption.[214]
HA! You are the one that wanted to make this personal, not me. And SPIs can not connect to anyone beyond 3 months. Nice try though. Time will tell.[215]
even tho when interacting with you I don't get a warm feeling— seriously, how do expect barbs like that to go? The way it looks to me, you're the one starting with the less-than professional conduct:
Whoa there big fellaand
lolis too chat room -like and is especially inappropriate in the midst of a heated dispute. So, I'm sorry, but it feels cherry picked and it ignores the impetus for the personalizing (you). Not saying the response is necessarily the best, either, but I'd wish you'd be more self-critical here. BTW, being friendly with someone, or friendship outright even, isn't something that would sway me. I've chided Gerda plenty. Gently, but still. El_C 01:50, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Whoa there big fella and lol is too chat room: I replied to someone who wrongly said that I "don't have consensus to change the stable version", when in fact, I restored the stable version (see this which enjoyed consensus for 3yrs, and the one just before KansasBear's edits. And now compare it to the current article). Moreover, they were already pre-planning a "meeting in the noticeboard" lol [216] without even hearing my reply or even knowing the actual context. He just gave me the big fella energy ( you're not that guy pal). Don't you think that's the least harmless reply I could've gone with, considering their wonderful comment?
even tho when interacting with you I don't get a warm feeling, I inherently respect any experienced editors like yourself just for the amount of work put on this website[217] This is the full sentence. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 02:13, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
even tho when interacting with you I don't get a warm feeling, I inherently respect any experienced editors like yourself just for the amount of work put on this website, they received feelings and assumptions of sockpuppetry with no proof, this could've ended somewhere in WP:AE or WP:ANI. Especially since I'm more than willing to voluntarily undergo an investigation (if there is any way, I really don't care), and I receive a reply of "Time will Tell".
Also, your sources did not state Armenian origin, taken in context their usage simply means the same as "dynasty that ruled over Armenia". Please look at the edit history of the article. I even tried to restore this which wasn't even discussed and was removed becasue of "WP:V". I added the exact page and the quote with it, yet it still got reverted.
Ah, how sweet still pulling all those rules. Odd how someone that has only edited for 6 months knows SO much about Wikipedia.[221]. Btw, that was in response to my comment in the talk. Also how come like-minded editors discuss on talk and achieve conesnsues, unanimously agreeing with each other, while I'm the only one with a different perspective? That's why I'm asking your input. Can you please objectively look at my edits and comment, and give us your thoughts? If the "origin" part was the issue in my edits, then surely Armenian dynasty should be added back in the lead because all of my added WP:RS sources mention it as Armenian dynasty. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 00:26, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Debresser's version already enjoyed consensus, at the very least loosely, via WP:SILENCE. You can't tell him that his version has no consensus when yours has even less! El_C 05:41, 31 July 2021 (UTC).
ZaniGiovanni, I don't understand what you're asking of me. I don't understand why you keep pinging me to that page. SILENCE is not an entitlement. Three editors disagree with you, all of whom veterans of the topic area, if you contend their views aren't representative of the interested editorial pool, you're free to run an WP:RFC that would determine whether this is or isn't so. There's noticeboards for conduct matters with which you are already familiar. I don't really know what else to say. El_C 01:39, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Why have they not made a re-make of this movie!?!? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 01:44, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Akhtar Raza Khan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Due to this edit (by an editor who hasn't edited in a month, rather conveniently) straight after the protection and image being restored, would it be possible for the protection to be increased to ECP please? FDW777 ( talk) 13:53, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi, El_C, and I hope you're doing well. Could you please unprotect or decrease the level of protection on 2021 Atlantic hurricane season to PC? The edit-warring between autoconfirmed editors has stopped. Thanks, Destroyer ( Alternate account) 20:35, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
The edit-warring between autoconfirmed editors has stopped. But the WP:ECP technically restricted them from making any edits to the page (edit warring and otherwise). So I was, like, stopped? How could it re/start? Cheers, El_C 12:42, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
The King of Rome - Dave Sudbury 1, HMHB 2, June Tabor 3 The Unthanks 4.
Narky Blert ( talk) 21:45, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
See Special:Contributions/CreatorofGod19. :) BilCat ( talk) 22:25, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello Sir El C, greetings from this side. The Draft Dremo is ready, please take a look at it. Thank you. -- Idoghor Melody ( talk) 23:16, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Greetings @ El C: I was curious about, if I report somebody thru the Noticeboard for Example... is this connected with Wiki-Commons or does it have to be another way? Because the Sock of JohnGotten ( User:Aquinasthomes1), is now doing his stuff on Wikicommons 1. -- InNeed95 ( talk) 14:48, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Meddlin' with the Blues. By no means the greatest blues number ever recorded (though that's some decentish harp playing). The point of interest is that Leonard and Mays performed in 1925 as The Two of Spades - which antedates the first written mention of the ethnic slur "spade" by 3 years. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:32, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hi , I 've Requested For Rollbackers Right on WP:PERM But Any Admin not Attention on My Request. Best Regards Maniik 🇮🇳Any Help🇮🇳? Contact Me. 14:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello EL C,
I am having some Serious issues with these ip's /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4021:7500:B1C1:3B4:BE3D:7CD2 and /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4021:7500:BCFD:E67:2830:3056. The person that created Tevin21 account was blocked indefinitely, the same person that created that account also used this ip /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4021:E900:58BF:FE40:E178:BED9 to add incorrect information to WWE Hell in a Cell please see these two edits by this ip- https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=WWE_Hell_in_a_Cell&oldid=1047818909 and https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=WWE_Hell_in_a_Cell&oldid=1047819090, This ip said that in his edit that The 2021 event was the final Hell in a Cell PPV held, as the event was discontinued and replaced by Bash at the Beach in 2022, to me that is a lie and WWE will never hold a bash at the beach ever again. Ever since protection ended for WWE Hell in a Cell these two ip's (2600:8800:4021:7500:B1C1:3B4:BE3D:7CD2 and 2600:8800:4021:7500:BCFD:E67:2830:3056) has resumed adding false information to WWE Hell in a Cell Chip3004 ( talk) 21:34, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
If you've got some time to waste, search YouTube for "animals house of the rising sun reaction". It's like another British Invasion - but this time with Black guys being reintroduced to their heritage, rather than White guys being shown what they'd ignored.
My OR is that in the late 40s to early 60s there was a handful of British merchant seamen who'd buy singles in the States, play them to death on the voyage home, and sell them when they got back. The Smokey Robinson/Motown fan was from Liverpool (hence The Beatles), the Chicago blues fan from London (hence The Stones), and the JLH fan from Newcastle (hence The Animals).
Lonnie Donegan was a minor musician - but his covers of Lead Belly and Woody Guthrie got into the UK charts in the 1950s, when the best that musicians like that could hope for back home was to get arrested. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:43, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
I thought the AE report on me over a month ago, was strange. But the current AN report, outdoes it. GoodDay ( talk) 16:26, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
You recently SPed that page to prevent disruption due to obvious socking. Needless to say; the socking has continued. RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 00:32, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, could you look at Special:Contributions/2A02:2F0E:6011:D00:78B8:36BF:F207:9CB9. Their continued edits on Bell 429 GlobalRanger are breaking the infobox along with edit warring, and the edit here looks like vandalism. Thanks. BilCat ( talk) 01:35, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Topal Osman. No sooner than the page protection expired, an IP removed referenced information. *sigh* In happier news, Chicago somehow beat Detroit. AND, my grandson Luke was born this morning! WOO HOO! -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 01:58, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. Wanted to ask if repeatedly pinging an editor who shares same POV constitutes as canvassing? Aydin mirza ( talk · contribs) has pinged Grandmaster multiple times, asking for opinions with a non-neutral tone [223], [224]. Despite me reverting their , they didn't ping me or any Armenian editors in talk. I tried to explain this to them, and notified them of canvassing, but they still pinged their favorite editor with non-neutral tone. Also, how can one apply for “third party” when multiple editors are already involved? ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 19:19, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Bukka White - "Aberdeen, Mississippi Blues" and " Poor Boy" - link.
Bonus live tracks - Hound Dog Taylor ( link) and Django Reinhardt ( link). Look at their left hands. Narky Blert ( talk) 20:46, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey, El C. Hope you're well. In a discussion about a block, several policy issues have emerged User talk:BleronZ#Block Appeal Discussion. I feel that a review by an admin who knows the Balkan topic area and is experienced in policy matters will be able to clarify them.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 21:42, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
User:Gerry Scott is almost delicately a cross wiki sock, and gamed extended confirmed in part by adding machine translations of movie plots. Should that be reverted, and it's there a way to roll them back en mass? Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 20:41, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello, El_C, a evasive user account keep posting the same type of comments at my talk page. Same type of comment a Anon IP posted months ago. Seems the same person. Mr.User200 ( talk) 22:37, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello El C,
Sorry to bother you. I removed a section at
Ilford Animal Cemetery, because it was a near word for word copy of part of the article it was referenced to. Not knowing enough about the subject matter, I didn't feel able to replace it.
This has now been done by a different IP user, but it simply reinstates what I removed with some very minor differences. I'm unsure whether this is enough, to no later nger be an issue. I was going to bring this up on the articles talk page, but I noticed that you have blocked the original poster (
User:Iyo-farm)). One of the few additions to what I removed was
"Its later use for the Nazi Holocaust, was only applied from 1942", which highly similar to additions by Iyo-farm. So I thought I would seek you advice. Thanks
89.241.33.89 (
talk)
17:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
Solomon Linda - " Mbube".
A lot of the subsequent recording history of " Mbube" is pretty seedy, but something like justice was eventually done. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:44, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Given your previous involvement in a discussion regarding this user, I'm hoping it's not a problem for me to ask you to take a look at this new thread. Thanks in advance. Magitroopa ( talk) 17:07, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey El C, hope you're well. I didn't want to open an ANI for this, as it seemed the case here is obvious. Sorry if I'm wrong, but if you could, please take a look. This new account, Fullstackdev, keeps edit-warring and adding content back without any consensus, and which is being discussed in talk and AfD. They leave ethnically charged deranged comments in talk [225]. Some lovely quotes:
I think the Armenians who lost the war in Karabakh think that they will win with wikipedia special forces.
Armenians are chasing a dream again. On many pages on Wikipedia, I see only articles created with Armenian sources.
All your propaganda efforts will be in vain. It is a war indemnity given by Armenia for losing the Zangezur Corridor at the end of the 44-day war. You should get used to it by now.
Their vote text is just something else on its own. Hope I'm not disturbing, but this case seemed obvious to me. They also added propaganda sources in different articles, such as calling the Armenian genocide "the Armenian problem" (common denialistic talking point), and shifts the blame to Armenian political party of that time, Hunchakian. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 18:09, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
I've just reverted another 18 unsourced/undiscussed mass genre changes by Bigfella77 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), their first edits since your block on the 2nd. They've still never discussed any of their edits. Time for an indef? -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 21:01, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
I think you should check for possible WP:STONEWALLING first, wouldn't it be better to try and deal with that? I think this is just going to lead to endless RfCs and drive editors away which is exactly what a stonewaller would want. NadVolum ( talk) 00:44, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C, in the process of closing the recent ARBIP amendment request I noticed that the obsolescence notice at WP:GS/IPAK still contained a placeholder permalink. Should this be updated just for maximum clarity? Thanks! firefly ( t · c ) 11:31, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
You probably know the famous English-French cover version - but this is the original, written and recorded by a Russian émigrée.
One of my better efforts was the enwiki biography of a résistant who got 12,000 views in WP:DYK; and another 3,250 last month, when - unprompted by me - he appeared in WP:OTD on the 78th anniversary of his death. (The median daily number is 3-4, more than for most of my articles.) Narky Blert ( talk) 22:25, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Please take a look here and revdel the offending revisions? This was in response to this thread at ANI. Cheers, RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 14:28, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
I recommend that the user Djm-leighpark not interfere with the second nomination process, as one of the similar articlespaces of the user has already been deleted with the same references ( Aerospace Research Systems, Inc.). I will look more into the user's activity in the near future to see if it warrants requesting to have the user blocked from possibly further vandalizing the encyclopedia.
Hi El C,
The protection that you put on Waun Mawn a few weeks ago has now lapsed, and with its lapse the "bearded ape" vandal has unfortunately returned. While they have only edited once as of this post, I see no reason why they won't resume their previous pattern; would it be possible for you to reinstate the protection, perhaps for longer this time?
BilledMammal ( talk) 10:55, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Fascinating Aïda - Cheap Flights. Narky Blert ( talk) 17:50, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello El_C. You page protected COVID-19 pandemic in Iran back in March 2020 under WP:GS/COVID19. However this page relies on two templates that remian unprotected, Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Iran medical cases & Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Iran medical cases chart. The first of which was vandalised today. I've reverted the vandalism, but was wondering if they should be protected as per the main article? Thanks 89.241.33.89 ( talk) 19:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Michael Tippett - " Steal Away" - link. It sounds like a difficult sing, there's a lot going on.
Off-topic, just to show I'm an old softy - Battle of Saragarhi.
[NB crosses his fingers that he's for once managed to post on this page without refactoring it.] Narky Blert ( talk) 21:01, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hello, after some break another user (Marcelus) is causing chaos in article Coat of arms of Lithuania, thus this vital article requires urgent actions. Marcelus previously had also participated in Talk:Pahonia#RFC: Pahonia and opposed the solution which currently is a WP:CONS, so he belongs to the same anti-Lithuanian nationalistic gang which received sanctions previously. Today he single-handedly removed two well-referenced paragraphs from this extended-protected article ( 1). Could you please apply sanctions to him which includes removal of his extended rights? I believe such vandal does not belong to the reliable extended-level users group. -- Pofka ( talk) 16:59, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
I'm hoping to avoid the whole rigamarole of ANI over someone making personal attacks. Would you be willing to take a quick look and maybe give a warning? Other users already have warned them, but they respond to earnings with more personal attacks against me. I'm hoping a word from an admin might make a difference. I've left details out for now so you won't be bothered if you're not interested. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 22:41, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Check your email. Cheers - wolf 15:49, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
The evidence is in the page history, the current dispute taking place on the page and the account status of those involved in the dispute;
You yourself acknowledged these ip users in your log remarks: "To the individual or individuals behind the latest IPs: if you do not engage other disputants on the article talk page ... you will effectively be forfeiting your position.
", basically making the protection a part of the dispute. If they're not disrupting the page anymore than user A is, they shouldn't be locked out while User A isn't. If you felt the content dispute was so disruptive that protection was warranted to quell the disruption and force the parties to talk, then perhaps full-protection with admin-only access, would've been the way to go. But beyond that, you were notified at the RPP that User A had also just filed at DRN (I don't know if that construes forum shopping or not?), why not let that process play out?
Anyway, I'm not trying to get up in your grill, I honestly belive you're one of the few, very good admins we have. I also know there has been a strong push of late to treat ip users equally with registered users, and to be friendly and accommodating to new users and those not familiar with all the processes and rules here. This lock could be seen as favoring a regular, registered user, giving them ammo for their fight, while causing disenchantment among the other users. I'm just trying to keep things balanced, that's why I requested you take a second, closer look. Thank you - wolf 20:45, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
To the individual or individuals behind the latest IPs: if you do not engage other disputants on the article talk page ( Talk:United States Army Special Forces) you will effectively be forfeiting your position. Thanks.
Downgrade, lengthen protection. IPs: you may still engage the article talk page ( Talk:United States Army Special Forces) at any time, but since you've failed to do so thus far, now it's this
But, if the IP/s fail to engage the talk in, say, a couple of days, let me know and I'll convert to a longer semiprotection, yet this lengthened semiprotection still surprises you. How so? You also say that it was "obvious" that you mistook the full protection with a semi'd one, but it wasn't obvious to me. Yes, I looked at the history, but not in the way that necessarily aligns with the evidence that you say exist, and yet to produce (the burden is on you, since you made the "weaponizing" claim).
"Lengthy"? I kept them as short as I could just to address points in your subsequent replies. (And like said, this medium sucks) If I wanted to bring this to a noticeboard, I would've, but I haven't. I asked you about it, and then decided to drop it. That is still my decision. Now, hopefully this is short enough. Have a nice day. - wolf 15:44, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I want to let you know about an on-going disruptive editing by an IP at 2021 Facebook outage page. Thanks, WikiLinuz ( talk) 17:37, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
EDIT: Looks like they're also here, reverting your talk pages. WikiLinuz ( talk) 17:44, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
In 1939, the Daughters of the American Revolution refused Marian Anderson permission to sing in Constitution Hall because of because. An outdoor gig was arranged instead. This seems to be the only surviving footage.
My Oath, but she was good. " Deep River", " Erbarme dich". (If you don't know the latter, it's a meditation on St Peter's remorse after his betrayal.) Narky Blert ( talk) 18:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
I'm not feeling motivated to assist with this matter. Presumptuousness and hostility will tend to have that effect. El_C 16:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I thought I'd remind you of your actions here [226], [227], and invite you to check out this set of edits [228], [229], [230], [231]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.30.19.189 ( talk) 21:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
|
I don't understand what any of this has to do with me. There are noticeboards to lodge complaints at. If you look at WP:AEL, you'd see that I've sanctioned many users. It's presumptuous to expect me to follow up on each of them. And it's discreditable to make baseless accusations if I don't stand at attention. I'm not an employee of any of you. I am not an employee of Wikipedia. El_C 16:21, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Ok, I have a problem; an editor makes two edits to Katamon a few hours apart:
I believe the editor broke 1RR (and Katamon is under 1RR), the editor in question apparently does not believe so (see the talk page). If I am wrong, then please WP:TROUT me; if not: please help me explain to the editor in question that he is wrong. (And, btw; I am not looking to sanction the editor over this in any way; my "goal" is just to make him (or me??) understand 1RR; cheers, Huldra ( talk) 23:06, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Jenny presumably ended up the DDR after WWII, changed her name, gave up her former career, and succeeded in a new one.
An Austrian baroness has preserved her memory. Narky Blert ( talk) 18:16, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello El C,
on 25 September 2021 you protected the page Diesel engine for ten days – apparently, this was not long enough… [233] Best regards, -- Johannes ( Talk) ( Contribs) ( Articles) 13:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi there El C, how are you doing? Would you mind changing the short desc in Turkish War of Independence, as the page is still fully protected? Seems like nobody objects to my proposal in talk. Sincerely, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 07:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I think you closed the recent Arbcom issue about BLPTALK violations at Talk:Israel lobby in the United Kingdom, brought by a user now blocked as a sock, who had redacted material on the talk page. This has now been un-redacted under the justification "rv sock". Do you know what the status of the material is? Should it be redacted or not? (Context: the redacted links include to SPSs purporting to doxx WP editors.) Thanks! BobFromBrockley ( talk) 19:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
Poronkusema. Narky Blert ( talk) 02:59, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Please request to protect article some users spreading vandalism. Sush150 ( talk) 05:54, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. Sush150 ( talk) 08:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your admin work! Always appreciate your wikignoming and reading your insights in discussions. Thought I'd share a kitten for an underappreciated editor. Cheers!
A. C. Santacruz ⁂
Talk
08:35, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, I was wondering whether you think it worth me contesting my TBAN on the basis that the AE was written up by 11Fox11, a now condemned sockpuppet of Icewhiz,] and Geshem_Bracha supported by Geshem Bracha, another Icewhiz sockpuppet]? Clearly Icewhiz had no right to raise the AE itself, and, in hindsight, I was being pursued by a highly POV and experienced banned user gaming the system. I've tried to ask Callanecc, but I've just noticed they haven't been active since 14 October, and you have been more involved in AE cases since then. As you have noted, 11Fox11 subsequently withdrew their case against Selfstudier, though Icewhiz continued their efforts in the case raised by Hippeus in their case against ZScarpia. I think the fact that 11Fox11 raised an AE against me while another was still ongoing and without asking me to revert are definitely aspects of the case that now can be seen in a different light after the SPI. Iskandar323 ( talk) 06:46, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
Pokémonfanxyz is a sockpuppet of Pritam kumar roni das. Their editing interest is nearly same and see this. This sock will ultimately get extended access very soon and will again resume the disruptions especially to the page Mon Phagun and other TV shows. Other confirmed socks were Pritam das 01022000 and Pritam Das 2000. Please block them. Thank you 2402:3A80:6F7:FE71:DCD8:69CE:4DCB:3B58 ( talk) 16:43, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi can you please increase security level of Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, it's sovereignty is disputed with Morocoo and article is always under attack with vandalism and propaganda edits, This article should be indefinite semi-protected like Somaliland, Artsakh and other. Ytpks896 ( talk) 21:01, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Sheesh, first a cywiki and now a viwiki 'crat indeffed from enwiki? What is it with these people, and some of the smaller Wikipedias? I suppose all we can do is encourage editors fluent in other languages to beef up their own Wikipedias, in the hope of building critical masses there (all puns intended). (I tried and failed with KIENGIR, but so it goes.) Hoping that WMF will do anything is like farting down a well and listening for the splash. </rant> Narky Blert ( talk) 22:30, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
WWII, about Lyudmila Pavlichenko (the Soviets favoured female snipers, as being more lethal than men) - Miss Pavlichenko.
Typical Woody song - catchy tune, socially aware (if atypically bloodthirsty) lyrics. Serious props to the guy on the fansite who spotted that obscure tune's reuse by a British post-punk band. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:37, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
It sounds like a class rant but it's really because I am the landlord of the pub that gets the cemetery— fuckin' brilliant!
The only one? That's good,
Narky Blert. Stay innocent! I'm not gonna be the one to introduce you to
horrorcore (probably). And speaking of being more lethal than men
, and in keeping to that promise, Smallz One is one
Narcissistic Bitch (WARNING - DISTURBING CONTENT) you do not want to encounter in some proverbial alley...
El_C
22:05, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
If time permits, can you take a look there? One editor closed a RM, one of the participants reverted the closure. The closer reverted suggesting a move review request, the other editor reverted again. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 20:45, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Licensing problems, perhaps? This track never seems to have made its way onto any Greatest Hits by the Clovers compilation. Narky Blert ( talk) 18:06, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
I’m afraid the editor whose request to fully protect the page you accepted is acting in bad faith. Please, check the revision he was continually reverting. He is also biased and obsessed with adding Cristiano Ronaldo’s 2017 celebration to the history section, despite the lack of reliable sources confirming it had a lasting impact on the rivalry. Even so, despite my objections I kept his additions with slight modifications and that too was reverted before he complained to admins citing non-existent “vandalism”. Trackfan20 ( talk) 06:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Small request: on WP:ITNN, I moved a ready mark from the prose to the headers, but still nothing, - the whole thing (not only that article) hasn't moved in 4 days. The person (28 Sep) died the same day as the one who has been top for these days, and there were no major changes needed for him as well, - it looks unfair. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:41, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
I may have spoken too soon, - one more was moved in. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:43, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
... and now Amakuru moved him in as well - one of these days I want to turn to Psalm 15, - I hope they'll stop dying -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:54, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Story: Once, kid me and a friend almost drowned in the Sea of Galilee. We swam stupidly and then the currents did not want to be our friend. After so many hours, we basically just stopped trying to fight it and focused on conserving the energy needed just to stay afloat. These kinds of currents are the main cause of drownings (usually due to exhaustion), with a few happening a year, and a few tens needing rescue. But anyway, then the current took us home (to shore), where much relief/freakout was had by all (military got scrambled for the search, it was intense). *** Nice pics! When Cow Man approves of a sunset, you know it's a sunset. El_C 14:35, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
Billy Bragg - " The World Turned Upside Down", about the Diggers. Narky Blert ( talk) 15:36, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
You have mail. - wolf 04:07, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
I see you protected the pages we had edit war on. I wonder if this will check what is written in the edit war. I hope it won’t remain the last thing he wrote, because I didn’t want to give back anymore. I hope he will write correctly, that there will not be something left that is not true and vandalism. Please someone check out these 3 articles and decide what exactly is there. Thank you 89.172.36.162 ( talk) 05:16, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello there! Apologies for removing on this User talk:103.144.225.75 page that my sig color is blue. I didn't know that it was a joke when you said that but yes.. I'd also laugh when I saw your reasoning why you edited back so yeah. Cornerstone2.0 ( talk) 06:32, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
While we're on the subject of Agitpop, the album which this song is from (released a year-and-a-half before Thatcher took office!) achieved a heady #144 on Billboard, so you may not know it. If you feel inclined, you can mouth "and me" during the pause. (I've still got the original album, and the stencil that came with it.) Narky Blert ( talk) 16:54, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I didn't understand your message "Technically unable to do so (only delete button displays for this page)." I'm thinking something to do with an admin tool? Is there any workaround? (page: User:DaxServer/BooksToSfn.js) — DaxServer ( talk) 18:49, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
Do you think this qualifies for revdel? Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:39, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
I came across this editor's userpage earlier today and redacted sensitive information. I just wanted to stop by here and say that the information I saw lead me to believe that this editor will be not as disruptive two years from now. I would have been the same way just a couple years ago. I gave them some advice. Feel free to respond if you don't think it was good. I am not sure if you were aware (you probably were). Scorpions13256 ( talk) 04:40, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Gary U.S. Bonds - Love's on the Line".
Good album. Useful backing band (I miss the horn player). Narky Blert ( talk) 06:31, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C, I hope you're doing well! Thanks for the ongoing song recs
Just wanted to let you know that your protection at
El Clásico recently expired. Thanks,
DanCherek (
talk)
11:52, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for protecting Battle of Chosin Reservoir, Hungnam evacuation. I also request similar protection of Second Phase Offensive and UN retreat from North Korea which have been experiencing similar issues. Mztourist ( talk) 15:32, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
berating: I need diffs+quotes — it isn't really reasonable to expect me to read a lengthy talk page. I'm sorry, I just don't have the time. Anyway, if you've reached an impasse on the article talk page, maybe get a Third opinion...? Unfortunately, this isn't an area with which I am especially familiar. El_C 16:29, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
www.royal-irish.com confusesand whether it is even a reliable source — not sure on both counts. El_C 16:37, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey! UTRS appeal #50241. I be praising the Lord and asking him to deliver this poor soul form their, well you done seen it. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:10, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
The Equestrian Statue of Marcus Aurelius in Rome owes its preservation on the Campidoglio to the popular mis-identification of Marcus Aurelius, the philosopher-emperor, with Constantine the Great, the Christian emperor.
I just hope those jugs didn't hold jake. Narky Blert ( talk) 20:54, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
El C, editor Pritam kumar roni das has again started editing from new account Serialbongo evident from their editing pattern and interests (They both have uploaded TV serial posters without licenses, editing List of Pokémon anime characters, and adding unverified information to Star Jalsha and Zee Bangla TV shows. For reference, User_talk:El_C#Sockpuppetry. Thanks. 42.106.236.200 ( talk) 15:39, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, hope you're doing well. Not to disturb you, but I honestly didn't think I should be even bringing obvious troll and ethnically charged cases to ANI. A while back, an edit-warring IP from Van cat started personally and racially attacking me in their talk page. I tried to inform the admin who previously protected the page, but I got no response. Today I wake up to see the IP follow me and rant under my post in the admin's page, again with the same weird ethnic and racially charged attacks/assumptions. The IPs "contributions to the project are mainly edit-wars in Van cat using different with different ranges [235], [236], [237]. I would very much appreciate if you could take a look. Regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 07:11, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Hey El C, just wanted to let you know that the user Çerçok continues with the same behavioral motive after his ban - WP:IDHT, tried to add WP:COATRACK material and accusing about omitting intentionally certain people etc. [238]. I know that WP:BALKANS policies are very strict with disruptive users so could you have a look? Thanks Othon I ( talk) 21:58, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Regrettably, there seems to be no early recording of this piece of caustic social commentary: " They're Moving Father's Grave to Build a Sewer"; clearly English music hall, if I'm any judge.
I've known the tune they segue into at the end, " My Old Man (Said Follow the Van)" since I was a child. (A song about a moonlight/midnight flit; we have no article; a house move out of office hours, performed the day before the rent collector brought the bailiffs in.) It was most famously sung by the great Marie Lloyd, for whom see Marie Lloyd#Risqué reputation and transatlantic tours 1st para. Narky Blert ( talk) 23:30, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
I was recently emailed through WP by a Nigerian editor. I did my own checks - and it seems that he really is someone who liked one of my articles and wants help in improving his editing skills, rather than being a prince who just needs some ready cash to unlock his family's fortune. So, I gave him what advice I could, rather than forwarding the email to ARBCOM with a satirical covering note.
Anyway, the experience reminded me of this classic from 2002. I don't have the patience to run that sort of exchange, but admire anyone who does. Enjoy! Narky Blert ( talk) 19:17, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
User Aj Indiana was blocked for 2 weeks by you on 15:03, 15 October 2021 for being disruptive and edit warring [239]. After 2 weeks, user didn't change his attitude and has been constantly involved in edit warring where multiple users have warned him on his talk page. He was again blocked on 16:11, 30 October 2021 for a period of 36 hrs [240]. But again the user has continued edit warring on multiple pages including Ranjit Singh where he inserts disputed information with unreliable sources and extremely poor grammar. He has been referred to take discussion to talk page where the topic is in place but he ignores it and continues to revert changes as he seems appropriate. Here is the latest warning he received [241] but still user isn't showing any improvement. He needs to be blocked indefinitely. Three times is a strike. MehmoodS ( talk) 20:04, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. But looks like the user created another account Mohmood20 [244] and he is using it to impersonate me. Even going as far as redirecting his account to mine [245]. This is clear that his intention is to jeopardize my account. I have reported him on sockpuppet investigation. [246]. But any quick assistance in blocking account of Mohmood20 indefinitely would be the right solution. Fact that he redirected the page to mine is clear violation. MehmoodS ( talk) 09:29, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. Sorry, I wasn't close to PC so sent message via phone. But I will make note of it. Thanks again. MehmoodS ( talk) 12:12, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, would you mind giving your input as a third opinion in this discussion? Regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 09:36, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for edit protecting the article I requested, I thought indefinitely would be better but it was my first protection request so I just went for what’s happened to the page previously. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia DirkJandeGeer ( talk) 16:00, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
The original, for reference purposes.
Balding old man sticks his foot on the monitor and the kids in his backing band melt into puddles of sweat. Narky Blert ( talk) 18:50, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
in relation this to your block of user 49.180.171.190 and that user’s request for unblock, [247], [248], would you mind taking a closer look and seeing if the ip user is the same person as User:Nvtuil and User:Sinwiki12? Like the ip user, nvtuil has been editing exclusively from a mobile device and on his user homepage also says he is from australia. When it comes to Sinwiki12 the ip user seems to suggest that he is the same person as the registered user in this edit [249] and draws on a spelling convention that is specific to Australian English - note the use of the word s instead of z [250]. All three users share the same geopolitical points of view, have edited on the same pages (this is what tipped me off that they might be the same person) and consistently fail to write content in a neutral way by not attributing the things they are writing to the authors and works that they are using. I don’t know if impersonating accounts or this sort of thing is allowed and what the penalties are but i have to think there has to be something that can be done about it given the tremendous amount of disruption that this type of activity can cause to the encyclopedia Estnot ( talk) 06:58, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
Elvis Costello & The Attractions - (What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding.
A cover, but IMAO greatly superior to the original by Brinsley Schwarz - a tighter band, and Elvis' producer avoided the *lightbulb* ideas of adding BVs at the words "sweet harmony" and the maudlin spoken bit for the benefit of anyone who hasn't been paying attention.
There's an entertaining video of The Boss playing it live, during which assorted people (perhaps attracted in from the street outside by the racket?) wander onto the stage to sing a line or two each. (The relentless drummer ruins it for me, though.) Narky Blert ( talk) 21:24, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know, I did actually miss that link at the very bottom. However I don't think we should restore the text since the first half is a copyvio of the linked source, and the rest (everything after "In reality...") appears to be original research. I didn't warn the user for unsourced content but I think I should maybe put a notice about copyright. RA0808 talk contribs 00:43, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
The movie is based on real life incidents which happened in the 1990s in Cuddalore district of Tamil Nadu and the accused police man in the real incident did not belong to Vanniyar community— news18 needs to hire better writers! El_C 00:56, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
I saw your block of ArtaXerxes58 and their socks, [251] and I noticed a new user, Al Ameer27.6. Said new user's edits oddly mirror ArtaXerxes58 and their socks.
Your thoughts? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 18:06, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
This is what user:D.Lazard posted, straight off the bat (under a feigned "third opinion" comment [252]), in reponse to user:HistoryofIran at the Talk:Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi page.
"HistoryofIran disputes this edit. In this disputes, HistoryofIran uses only procedural arguments, whithout discussing whether King's opinion is notable enough for being mentioned in Wikipedia. Moreover the name "HistoryofIran" suggest that he is not neutral on this subject, and that he is here for pushing Iran's official point of view (possible WP:COI)."
I find this to be a pretty gross violation of WP:NPA, WP:BATTLE and WP:AGF. - LouisAragon ( talk) 22:08, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Stop sniggering at the back! Narky Blert ( talk) 20:15, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
The Only Ones - " Another Girl, Another Planet" - video - Peel session (not a carbon copy). It turned up in Peel's Festive Fifty (listener-voted) 1978-1982 and 2000, but commercially sank without trace.
The band reformed in the 2000s, but the singer's voice was totally shot. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:03, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Hello, can you please protect this page Islamic State – Khorasan Province because if you look at the page history you will see anonymous users keep removing huge content from the page and this has caused an edit War. 197.52.28.131 ( talk) 10:40, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Gavin Bryars - Jesus' Blood Never Failed Me Yet - link.
Bonus #1 - link. I'd love to know who scripted that, and whose idea it was - I suspect they asked TW on, and he improvised most of it.
Bonus #2 - Tom Waits - " Downtown Train" - link. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:58, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Greetings El C due to continuous disruptive editing recently the Vuk Karadžić page was protected but it did not stopped with vandalism. This "new" IP Special:Contributions/93.138.19.195 started their edit warring on that page with the same behaviour on Mate Parlov page. Can something be done. Thank you. User:Theonewithreason ( talk) 13. November 2021 (UTC)
Hi User:El_C in relation your block on User:49.180.171.190 (background information: [253] and [254]) can you take a look at user 49.228.19.151’s edits ( Special:Contributions/49.228.19.151) and see if they might be related? Both ip users have
1) made their first series of edits on the encyclopedia by tracking my previous edits across multiple articles (49.180.171.190 followed by edits on Wilson Sporting Goods, Concerns over Chinese involvement in 5G wireless networks, Meng Wanzhou, Extradition case of Meng Wanzhou [255]; 49.228.19.151 followed my edits on Chen Shih-chung and the United States [256])
2) made baseless allegations against me (49.180.171.190 has accused me vandalism [257] & [258]; 49.228.19.151 has accused me of canvassing [259]
3) showed intricate knowledge of editing policies of the encyclopedia despite being “new” editors (49.180.171.190’s third edit on the encyclopedia makes reference to wp:blp [260]; 49.228.19.151 second edit makes reference to wp:canvassing [261])
4) addresses which geolocate to the same region (both start with 49) which suggests the same person is editing on both accounts using a proxy server.
I also do recall encountering an editor who used the exact term “gish galloping” on another China related article but cannot at this moment recall which one specifically at this moment.
I’m sorry to bother you again but (once again) your help here would be most welcome Estnot ( talk) 12:41, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Richard Thompson - " Turning of the Tide". Narky Blert ( talk) 18:11, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Please I request you to block this 182.56.210.144 ip address. Doing unsourced edits. Sush150 ( talk) 07:19, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
The ip address is doing repeated unsource edits in Badhaai Do, Atrangi Re, Bachchan Pandey, Raksha Bandhan, Jug Jugg Jeeyo, Thank God, Radhe Shyam and Rocky Aur Rani Ki Prem Kahani film articles. Sush150 ( talk) 07:25, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. Sush150 ( talk) 11:13, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
You've got one of this great man's best-known songs in your spamlist; here's a little-known one, from the end of his career. (The second-last verse was prophetic.)
For balance, here's one by his great rival. (The sleeve credits Johnny Winter for "miscellaneous screaming".) Narky Blert ( talk) 12:39, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Hey there, it’s been a second, I hope you are fine and In good health, quick one here, In hindsight you always called diffs in mobile format your weakness, needless to say you sure as hell don’t like mobile format diffs & you have (positively?) corrupted me and I try to de-mobilize every diff I make. Recently I used a diff in mobile format see here & @ Ritchie333 converted it to desktop format, and user the word “conventional” which I thought was quite funny & made me laugh, I might have asked you before(I’m not so sure) but my question is what is the fundamental difference between the both? R333 please I’d be happy to hear from you as well. Celestina007 ( talk) 12:45, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Greetings,
I got curious with long list of warning messages to the IP over the years Special:Contributions/202.142.177.7. It is relatively minor spam cases once in a while but consistently over the years. Seem to be a static IP.
Usually I don't feel like recomonding blocking IPs and Users, so I did not report directly @ notice board. May be you can look into it with your experience better .
Thanks
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 17:57, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, that what I thought.
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 00:29, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
Wow, that was really not excellent. In indefinitely blocking a 15-year editor, you cited WP:BLUDGEON, which is not only an essay, but a largely stupid essay which says, among other things, "Typically, the [bad, bludgeoning] person replies to almost every '!vote' or comment, arguing against that particular person's point of view. The person attempts to pick apart each argument with the goal of getting each person to change their '!vote'". This is presented as bad behavior (!), and I guess it's bad enough to get kicked off the project (!!). What the heck is AfD supposed to be for if it's not to present facts and arguments to persuade.
But wait. The blocked editor's (supposedly horrible, blockable) efforts were at a Deletion Review advocating for the overturn of a deletion, where the deletion was indeed overturned and supporting an article at an AfD where the article is going to be kept. (It looks like, tho maybe not cos you've, I don't know, kicked out a key editor addressing objections to the article, altho you could have waited.) So it's not like he was wrong. That matters.
I haven't looked at your WP:NPA allegation in detail, but its for sure that Supermann was goaded quite a bit (including by a sock at one point). I do think he rose to the bait and got more testy (and arch) at times then you'd like to see. Other editors were worse, I think... and goading is not a good look. Sorting all this out fairly and correctly would take scores of man-hours which is why I recommended leaving it alone since there was a fair amount of bad acting all around, tempers got a little bit inflamed as happens, but no serious violations of any rules were made (essays aren't rules), and nothing that couldn't be handled locally and it's not going to be a running sore cos the AfD is going to be closed soon.
But you think different I guess, and your call. Wrong call, but I understand; I know the admin corps is super overworked and all, and of course you're going to make rash, poorly considered actions when you're tired and stressed. But I mean if you didn't have the time to do it right, you didn't have to do anything. So I mean if you want to reflect on that, that'd be great IMO, but up to you. Herostratus ( talk) 19:42, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing. Specifically, WP:BATTLEGROUND conduct (at times testing the boundaries of WP:NPA, if not exceeding it outright) and WP:BLUDGEON to excess.In any case, I've reopened that ANI thread, so you're welcome to bring your concerns for wider review. El_C 20:06, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi User:El_C in relation to your block of User:Supermann and also User:Lolitart [262], it appears that they are sockpuppet accounts. Both accounts:
Can you look into this issue in a bit more detail? Estnot ( talk) 04:45, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
I'm feeling old. My PC is acting old (mofoboard problem I suspect). While I'm trying to sort that issue out, Monteverdi's " Toccata" (1607) just doesn't get old. Narky Blert ( talk) 22:14, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C could you advise why you asked that I not alter a title? My understanding from WP:SECTIONHEADINGOWN is that “It is generally acceptable to change headings when a better heading is appropriate, e.g., one more accurately describing the content of the discussion or the issue discussed”
The only reason the title was not set this way originally was my human error. My
thread open starts with This is a behavioral issue from two editors
so it seemed appropriate to correct my error to make it clear to whom it refers. Is there a reason we shouldn’t adjust headings on AN/ noticeboards generally? Thanks
Cambial —
foliar❧
19:40, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, you protected McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II back in October from an IP user that refused to discuss their changes. The user has returned to make the same edits as before. See Special:Contributions/210.185.97.52, which locates to the same city as Special:Contributions/203.221.79.237 and the others. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BilCat ( talk • contribs)
![]() |
In November, I can offer some reading, - three feast days in a row, reformation followed by All Saints' and All Souls. On All Saints, we sang in choir in a mass - a 2021 first - and rehearsed (with the other group) for the next such thing next Sunday. All Souls is the birthday of the subject of my first article who will play a major concert on 14 November. Today we "celebrate" the first DYK for which LouisAlain laid the base in a German sandbox, - needlessly complicated but working. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:48, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Library hijinks:
//And... scene. How am I not finished this book yet? I gotta stop being Busi-ness Man and start being Reading Man again. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 00:41, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
BTW, finally finished Rome: A History in Seven Sackings last week. New book: Matt Taibbi's Hate Inc. (2019). El_C 13:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed you applied full protection to the article. I requested indefinite pending changes protection because the article (like other India-Pakistan topics) is prone to vandalism like this. The content dispute in question has died down and consensus has been reached (and one of the parties has been taken to ARE), so a whole week of full protection seems a bit too extreme. Cipher21 (talk) 13:12, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
ARE page. Anyway, maybe get some outside input into the content dispute, like a WP:3O or WP:RSN. I'm sorry, but I'm not really available to help with that myself at this time. El_C 17:54, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Then start an WP:RFC, I dunno. But a content opponent of yours in this dispute, Suthasianhistorian8, has not been banned at WP:AE. I'm not going to modify the protection right now. Why are you expending so much energy on that? It hasn't even been a day. El_C 05:35, 21 November 2021
Someone, firstly as an IP editor and then with an account created for the purpose of continuing reverts, is changing sourced content. Three editors, including me, have asked them to not change sourced content and provide reliable sources for their own claim. However, they have persisted, and maybe a short semi protection is needed. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 13:02, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to your new computer! Please confirm that you own your primary email acct by entering the security code we have sent to your secondary email acct. Welcome to your new computer! Please confirm that you own your secondary email acct by entering the security code we have sent to your primary email acct. I think that's one for tomorrow. Meanwhile, I'm setting up everything I like under a pseudonym, whose DoB may or may not be correct but which allows me to access adult content. J'ai changé cent fois de nom. All I need now is a spurious cellphone number to confirm my identity.
Meanwhile, I've been listening to:
Hi! As you're probably aware you banned me earlier in the month from ANI for CIR (justifiably so). I have recently been the target of personal attacks at an AfD I started here, by Roxy the dog. I wish to de-escalate the situation but I don't reallly know how. I don't have any bad will against them and recently buried the hatchet with them. I asked a few times to see if the other user would apologize and stay on-topic to the discussion but they have not, and don't know what else to do without escalation (especially since this might be affecting other users as well). Santacruz ⁂ Please tag me! 16:34, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
{{no ping|Roxy the dog}}. El_C 12:05, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi everyone. Sorry, but some stuff came up, so I'm a bit pressed for time for the next little while — it's quite possible I overlooked something important. Still, a couple of notes, FWIW. A._C._Santacruz, I'm not seeing personal attacks in that AfD (Nov 23), and certainly not harassment, Bilby (again, maybe I missed it). Granted, Roxy the dog's criticism of your [A. C. Santacruz], uh, content focus (?) isn't particularly gentle. But is gentle always better? When you asked Roxy for an WP:APOLOGY (Nov 6), that read awkwardly to me. I'm sorry to say, but it comes across as misdirected at best and a provocation at worst (which I'm sure wasn't your intent). In general, I'm of the view that forced/requested apologies are rarefy if ever a good idea. I'd probably respond in the negative to such a request had it been directed to me, tbh.
Still, admittedly, I am not entirely unbiased here as I've always been firmly on the camp of the pro-science editors (regulars at WP:FTN, etc.). Like, with the section you've linked to ( User_talk:Roxy_the_dog#Questions) that seems to be about Roxy resisting attempts to remove the pseudoscience descriptor from the Astrology page, even though the WP:ARBPS talk page notice {{Ds/talk notice|topic=ps}} is at the top of its talk page. Anyway, I think ScottishFinnishRadish advise about de-escalation was pretty good, at least for now.
Sorry, that's all the time I can really expend to this right now. Other admins' mileage may vary. @ Wugapodes: maybe help out with this one, too...? If you do, I'm willing to illegally campaign for your ArbCom candidacy. I already have a good slogan: Opabinia regalis has failed the cat community — a vote for Wugapodes is a vote for kittens! El_C 12:05, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
ape— he said
went ape at ANI over it. That's just normal slang to 'going overboard', excess, etc. In fact, I'm reading Hate Inc. right now and Taibbi uses that exact phrase in a way that, to me, comes across as relatively inoffensive (I'll see if I can find the quote, since it was just a few pages ago). Anyway, I'm not sure what you want me to do.
being targeted by anti-pseudoscience editors around here is really being branded as pro-fringe just for disagreeing with themhere,
I just noticed that ScottishFinnishRadish is not only at war with GSoW, but is actively supporting Fringe. They removed pertinent criticism info from the BLP of "medium" Thomas John Flanagan, including the summary of his felony conviction from the lead.That was because I removed clear BLPvio here and here. I don't know if that is harassment, but it's certainly WP:BATTLEGROUND and uncivil. Also, that article could probably do with some revdel. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 14:47, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
Paul Robeson - " Ol' Man River" - link.
It is a cause for enduring regret that Robeson only recorded one of Dvořák's ten Biblical Songs - " By the Waters of Babylon" (in the original Czech, yet).
Am I right in thinking this may be to your taste, or is that pie in the sky?
{added) a historical document by Harry K. McClintock. Narky Blert ( talk) 22:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
That Showboat clip is remarkable for 1936. Even years later (to at least Hellzapoppin', 1941), Hollywood films would include a toe-curling musical interlude in which a group of darkies would discover a piano on the set and hold an impromptu dance party.
Neither the hymn nor the parody is well-known in UK; but " pie in the sky" is long-established idiom (from at least the 1950s to my knowledge). I'd make a small wager that "The P and the S" had been brought over by a labo(u)r activist, and that those Scottish miners knew both the song and who Joe Hill was.
The most unexpected articles can get serious numbers of views. When I wrote C. Austin Miles, I never expected 20 views/day; nor anywhere near 17 for the Dvořák cycle. Narky Blert ( talk) 20:49, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
I've been told obtaining consensus is a blockable offence, and in the same discussion asked by the same person and another editor they tagged to do the opposite. Now I'm confused. Cipher21 (talk) 18:30, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
blocked/banned for disruption, either (by TrangaBellam). I presume it's due to... reasons. And I wouldn't worry about that
Filing an edit request to reinstate deleted content is cheeky. If it gets reported to admins they will take a dim view of it(by Kautilya3). I just presume you didn't know that this isn't what edit requests are for.
Godley & Creme - " Under Your Thumb". One of the very few ghost stories in popular song. Narky Blert ( talk) 00:36, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C! I'd like to ask for your help with an edit war at Talk:Ali#problematic_edits. Thanks! Albertatiran ( talk) 08:16, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: persistent IP vandalism due to emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant after expiry of protection has resumed. Already asked at WP:RfPP yesterday, but seems fo lks are busy. Thanks 2402:3A80:6C1:96A:9464:D5D3:4371:B576 ( talk) 04:04, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Steve Winwood - " Arc of a Diver" - link
He was so disgustingly talented that he had a UK #1 at age 15 with " Keep on Running" - link. (I prefer the cover to the original, but only just.)
(Another Steve scored a US #1 at age 13 - link.)
Bonus track, because I'm feeling generous today. ( This is the song being parodied.) Narky Blert ( talk) 23:23, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
I will be appealing my topic ban at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard SecretName101 ( talk) 00:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
I want to express to you, not out of anger, but disappointment, that it hurts you so quickly reached a “no” decision.
I am far less disappointed that you want to retain that topic ban than I am at why and how you are reaching and justifying said judgement.
I had already, long before, acknowledged to you the I now recognized the article was “overwhelmingly negative” in those exact words, yet you penalize me for not repeating myself on it? I said I would submit ANY negative-leaning article on marginal figures for review first, that EXCEEDS your concern. Yet you flag that as unsatisfactory.
You judged me solely on outlying mistakes, and utterly ignored longstanding and continued positive contribution to the project.
You had urged me to make edits to show I am valuable to the project. I make over 1,000 edits on a variety of subjects, and you do not even acknowledge them.
These topic bans are to prevent threats of disprution to the project. Not to punish. You have not based your arguments on what threat of disruption I would actively pose.
And we had been over that I didn’t, at the time, see politicians having a different format than other BLP on crimes. Yet you played ignorant to our previous discussion on that.
You also have reignited a micro aggression towards me, and are seeking to penalize me for having not sat silent when that initial micro aggression occurred. Characterizing people who fail to recognize the exact same patterns as others as incompetent IS a clear micro aggression towards neurodiverse individuals. SecretName101 ( talk) 02:52, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
that it hurts you so quickly reached a “no” decision, but in any case, I'd rather the discussion not be split (yet again: [270] [271]), so please incorporate any arguments you see fit toward your appeal, rather than doing so here. Thank you. El_C 03:08, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
Back in 2019, you put an editnotice in place regarding the listing of victim names. I assume this wasn't the 1st time or the last. What criteria goes into making that decision? Just curious since another one is being debated again. Thanks -- GoneIn60 ( talk) 09:31, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Jacques Brel - " Au suivant".
No subs on that, but there's a version in English by Scott Walker, a very good interpreter of Brel - " Next". Narky Blert ( talk) 20:08, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. I'm wondering whether the special editing restrictions from March this year on Dabaqabad are still in effect atm. I looked into this concurrently after they appeared to snub the consensus translation of four Italian-speaking editors on a Caroselli book, subsequently edited by user Lambian : ( link), an action they repeated here, in both cases without a talk page comment. Then I saw this article's history; they made reverts in November without a talk page comment, and again on the 5th of December without a talk page comment; this appears to me to be a snub of their ARBHORN restrictions. In their talk page comments they also smeared Jama Omar Issa as prejudiced, thus unreliable, for a typo he made in 1976 when the Somali script was 4 years old ( link), even though he has been peer reviewed 113 times per google scholar. Before this thread, I was wondering if its allowed to unarchive the currently archived case. Heesxiisolehh ( talk) 06:47, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C long time no talk, hope you're doing well. I had concerns regarding a user you have tbanned from AA. Following the tban of DriedGrape and their subsequent tban violation block, they have edited AA content again: [275], [276]. First diff they added an Azerbaijani name, and in second diff they removed a bunch of sourced info regarding Armenia. Hoping that you could take a look. Best regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 12:08, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Hey, El C. Hope you're well. Can you close a report I filed at SPI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Solomon155? The sockmaster account and the sock are revert-warring together and they're adding information which is not discussed by the bibliography. If all articles targeted by them were permanently semi-protected or required autoconfirmed status it'd be even better.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 00:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Can you please review and close the discussion at Talk:Oxford High School shooting#Names_of_victims? My initial request was going to be at the seven day mark, but another editor suggested "7-10 days", so I leave it to you to decide the best time, but I believe given our prior interactions nobody would ever suggest you were biased in any way towards my position in these discussions. If not you, could you recommend an admin with a history of closing contentious discussions? Thank you! — Locke Cole • t • c 06:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Boccherini - Guitar Quintet No. 4 - " Fandango".
I myself will attempt the invocation - " Gerda, Gerda! Wache, erwache!"
(I don't think I could get Silvia Duran through WP:NBIO, but she's mentioned at Dance in Israel#Flamenco.) Narky Blert ( talk) 22:11, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
A couple of weeks ago you salted Anwar Shah Orakzai. While NPP reviewing, I found that it was re-created today as Anwar Shah Orakzai (Journalist). Would it be beneficial to salt that one too, as well as the lowercase Anwar Shah Orakzai (journalist). Curbon7 ( talk) 07:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Please protect Breast tax. CoachEzhupunna ( talk) 08:10, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
What connects the following?
![]() | This list is
incomplete; you can help by
adding missing items. |
Hints available on request. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:47, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I have created an article called " Council of Troyes (1129)". However, there is a page Synods held at Troyes that redirects any Council of Troyes to that particular article. Is there anyway to remove the redirect for " Council of Troyes (1129)"? Or some other solution? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 00:52, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
#REDIRECT [[Synods held at Troyes]] {{R with possibilities}}is deleted. The reason I ask is that’s what I would have done so if there’s somethng wrong wth doing that it would be good to know. DeCausa ( talk) 08:48, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
You protected the page earlier and you did it again but I just want you to know that you will see such disruptions only on List of converts to Islam from Hinduism and and not vice-versa. Kindly see Category:Lists_of_religious_converts_-_possibly_widespread_BLPvios where you can clearly check admin Black Kite's comments about it. I have also experienced that a handful of editors (some of whom are blocked already [277] follow this pattern to edit war, sometimes with false edit summaries, [278] without checking the sources [279] and they do it just to get the page protected from editing.
In the ANI discussion, if you spare 5 mintues and read this incident, you will see my edits to the page were all adequetly sourced and comply with BLPCAT whereas the other editor's edit summaries were not true and several other editors have commented on that.
This has been happening agian and again and it is quite exhaustive to contribute further when you have to explain these things to such editors who clearly have a vandetta and keep removing the edits. As an admin, can you please honestly suggest me a way to fix the problem permanently to keep Wikipedia unbiased and so that I can contribute in other areas? Thanks. -- Bringtar ( talk) 17:08, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Why was this protected? It's only used on two pages, so is not high-risk. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:11, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
I obviously haven't looked at the whole list, but the entries I *have* looked at that were removed look well sourced. I think you may have have unwittingly backed up a religious warrior there. Black Kite (talk) 18:32, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Just as an update, with
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of religious converts now live (which I added to
WP:CENT as it involves over 25 pages), the argument about bio cruft seems broader than just this one page. And calling the OP a religious warrior
may have missed the mark. Because it's valid to argue against bio cruft just as it is to argue that these lists have value to readers. Hopefully, the deletion discussion can clarify on which side of consensus (or lack thereof) these arguments fall. Anyway, what I'm getting at is that this seems to be a legit position for the OP to advance. (Personally, I don't know enough about these lists to favour any one side.)
El_C
14:36, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
The IP user involved in the dispute at the article Lithuania–Taiwan relations, which you've recently temporarily protected, is actually in trouble for numerous offences, not just relating to that article. In fact, they probably should have already been blocked days ago for other reasons, but they've been able to get away with even further wrongdoings due to a lack of attention from other administrators (the only administrator who has been commenting on my case for a while has been David Gerard). David Gerard has already temporarily protected the article China–Lithuania relations from the same IP user (it's a different IP address but the user has been IP-hopping; Wikipedia:Sock). A case at ANI has already been opened up by me in order to address a personal attack that this IP user has thrown out at me prior to the bulk of their disruptive editing. The user is guilty of:
— Jargo Nautilus ( talk) 06:32, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Hey El C! I noticed you put a month of semiprotection on this talk page back on October 2, per an RFPP request. I personally don't mind semiprotection of talk pages if there is a good reason, which there is in this case. Especially since WP:ARBR&I applies. So consider this my vote for a renewal of the semiprotection, in case you were considering it. Maybe even 3 to 6 months. I'm writing to you instead of just doing protection myself in case you are aware of other discussions on this idea, either in favor or against it. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 04:02, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi, El_C. I have noticed that you are less active in DS than you were, but could you take an unbiased look at [[[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Maneesh|this]]]? I'm not special pleading for you to "take my side" - which I know isn't how you roll - but that specific situation seems to be generally spiralling and could use some "new" eyes, I think. Just if you get a chance. Newimpartial ( talk) 13:21, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
I'm not special pleading for you to "take my side", you're still reaching out to a specific admin to look at a thread with three other admins commenting because you'd think it
could use some "new" eyes. It's really not a good look that you're seeking specific admin attention at WP:AE, especially because you don't seem satisfied with the three sets of admin eyes already looking into it. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 13:56, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
wallowing, well then, our perceptions differ. And I don't see how my reaching out to a specific admin whom I know only because they subjected me to an IBAN years ago is in any way against policy. There certainly isn't any reason to think El_C would be biased in my favor. I would just like to see more eyes on the filing, so it doesn't get bogged down in proceduralism, etc. Newimpartial ( talk) 14:15, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
76.30.143.210 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS)
Heads up, this user that you blocked appears to be misusing their talkpage access. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:95E8:4DB9:3862:F374 ( talk) 20:57, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I just saw that you seemingly pinged me (and others) at someone else's talk page, and advised us not to make further comments exceeding the word limit. I didn't get that ping and didn't see that until just now after I added more comments. I actually had forgotten that AE had word limits for commentors. It's hard for me with AE and other heavy disputes because I feel like I need to address and refute various claims, but at the same time I don't want to turn the thread into a TL;DR and scare off the fresh eyes that are most needed. So, sorry about that. Crossroads -talk- 07:45, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
I saw this and went to the "that" — which led me to make the following discovery:
Why do the following 19:23, 7 November 2021 + 23:41, 7 November 2021 comments not appear in the WP:RS/N history:
I didn't think it would be long until the culture warriors targeted PinkNews, and I don't think it should be too long until they are politely told that it won't be happening, either. Black Kite (talk) 19:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)"
Thank you for your concern, but I don't believe that labelling editors who come to Wikipedia to edit with a certain POV on a subset of articles (whether that be cultural, political, religious or anything else) to be derogatory, merely factual. Black Kite (talk) 23:41, 7 November 2021 (UTC)"
Who hid the
comments by Black Kite from the Revision history — and why?
What's going on here, because this smells to high heaven. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 14:44, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
Is it possible that you have changed your timezone" – just checked my prefs. It's set on wiki default. Argh! Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 15:33, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
If you thought we were being bad in the Maneesh case, the Barecode case is fast approaching the length of a respectable article in its own right! Sideswipe9th ( talk) 02:20, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Io, Saturnalia! | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth ( talk) 14:52, 17 December 2021 (UTC) |
Jinx.
Feel free to change it back to your version if preferred. -- Euryalus ( talk) 05:51, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
I haven't really edited since I threw in the towel. All I've done here this last year is remove some crap from my talk page, restore an image that was butchered by the non-free reduction bot, and correct a couple of glaring errors in articles that I happened to read which annoyed me so much I couldn't leave them. I only really stay logged in because I prefer viewing the site with the personal JS and CSS on my account.
Somebody elsewhere told me I only needed 10 edits to vote in the Arbcom election, which surprised me, so I voted anyway, just for the lulz.
Having been pointed to ANI by a discussion in another place I noticed the oblique reference to me, so I commented. That makes me 90% eligible to waste a vote in the next pointless election already, I guess...
What I'm really saying, I suppose, is don't expect a return any time at all, but don't think we evil monitors of wiki-nonsense aren't always lurking, ready to pounce with our ineffectual drivel.
Stay safe. Nice to hear from you. Begoon 14:33, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Holiday cheer | |
Here is a snowman a gift a boar's head and something blue for your listening pleasure. Enjoy and have a wonderful 2022 El C. MarnetteD| Talk 02:55, 19 December 2021 (UTC) |
Hello. I am working on UTRS appeal #52253. This user wishes to have their community ban reviewed by the community. It has been about a year and they claim to have not attempted to circumvent the ban in that time.
I have my doubts that their attitude is one that will convince the community to reverse the ban, they still seem to be blaming the admin who proposed the ban.
Regardless I would like to let them make an appeal on-wiki to see what the community feels. Since you removed talk page access I would like to get your opinion first.
I would of course give them advice prior to doing so. Looking forward to your response. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 03:32, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Dear El C,
Thank you for participating in the recent
discretionary sanctions community consultation. We are truly appreciative of the range of feedback we received and the high quality discussion which occurred during the process. We have now posted a
summary of the feedback we've received and also a preview of some of what we expect to happen next. We hope that the second phase, a presentation of draft recommendations, will proceed on time in June or early July. You will be notified when this phase begins, unless you choose to to opt-out of future mailings by removing your name
here.
--
Barkeep49 &
KevinL (aka L235)
21:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C - noticed you hadn't been around for a while. Hope all's well and you're just taking a break - God knows you deserve it. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 17:58, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I was tagged here, I wondered if responding to these accusations that weren't made in any good faith whatsoever would be a violation of the topic ban. I think it would, but I wanted to make sure. In this case, should I not respond at all? I took into account that you were the enforcer on topic ban, and I thought it would be best to ask this to you. --► Sincerely: Sola virum 07:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
For Stolperstein and History of the Jews in Dęblin and Irena during World War II, both have seen recent activity from likely socks. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:48, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. The thread is at
WP:AN#Review_of_30/500_protection Thanks
Girth Summit
(blether)
12:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Given your previous involvement in imposing some discretionary sanctions in this area, I felt only natural that I should also inform you of an open ArbCom case request. Thanks, RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 01:51, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hope to be back (in some capacity, at least) sometime next week. Thanks, everyone, for your collective patience. In the meantime, Songspam, per usual. El_C 00:19, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I've just seen I've been mentionned multiple times in discussions and I think I'm detached enough now so that I'll be fine to answer by myself on the subject. I must admit I wrote once last week or so because I wanted to make a point to another editor I used to engage with back in february. I forgot about the voluntary stuff tbh. But if you'd accept to remove my voluntary sanction i'd appreciate it. Thank you very much for your help back in february, you didn't "mishandle" anything. You helped me make it end when I was in my (let's say more intense) phase and wasn't really liking how I was being treated as a conspiracy theorist. Feynstein ( talk) 14:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Dear @ El C:, could you please have a look at the tone of user Alalch Emis in /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Zangezur_corridor AfD and advise whether that behaviour is within the Wikipedia standards for editors' interaction? The person appears to have zero knowledge in the topic yet hard convictions based on cold-searching Google, and got agitated because I pointed out that he should not WP:OR in already highly controversial subject and suggested to self-revert then discuss his additions. If he kept it limited to tendentious editing and commented only on my actions I would somehow tolerate that, but after I pointed out that targeting the editor's personality like "you're boring" and repeatedly using inflammatory language like "you're wasting your time" and "you can keep spinning it whichever way you like" is not acceptable, he showed no insight. From his talk page /info/en/?search=User:Alalch_Emis I can see he had similar problems with another article which you closed the case of. What's the right course of action, please? TIA! --Armatura ( talk) 17:00, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Delete. Dear colleagues, I strongly remind that Wikipedia is not a place for political influence. Zangezur corridor doesn't exist, so this provocative article should be deleted( diff). Why has their !vote gone unchallenged, but the ones by the SPAs !voting keep have? So, I really dislike this type of imbalance, which I find erodes the project's credibility. Anyway, while it's expected for a contentious deletion discussion to ebb and flow, I'm seeing a lot of ebbing, but not much flow. Maybe take a step back from the discussion so as to calm the waters a bit...? HTH! El_C 21:20, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
As you were the admin that applied the semi-protect to Talk:COVID-19 misinformation, what would be your thoughts on applying the same to Talk:Investigations into the origin of COVID-19? The talk page has, particularly recently, gotten significantly more IP-based cruft. Particularly with low quality accusations, sometimes indicating the article was not read by the user. An additional sampling from the last week:
Naturally, all of this is disruptive, and a drain on editor time to address. Would you consider protection of this talk page as falling under WP:GS/COVID19 for the same reason as the misinformation talk page protection, or is there a noticeboard you'd suggest taking this to? Thank you. Bakkster Man ( talk) 13:23, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
The local description page of the POTD image is cascade protected, so there is no need to protect it. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello - after you handled the vandalism of trans BLPs I reported yesterday (thank you for this), two other IPs in the same subnet (147.161) that vandalized those pages vandalized the pages of two other trans women, Tifanny Abreu and Alexandra Grey. I don't know how to file a request for a rangeblock or whatever it's called, but am hoping you or another admin can help. Funcrunch ( talk) 02:23, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi EI C,
This IP you blocked is back with vengeance :( OyMosby ( talk) 15:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for protecting List of Jeopardy! contestants. However, the talk page is still being spammed. Could you also protect Talk:List of Jeopardy! contestants? Thanks. AldezD ( talk) 20:14, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey El C, did you find what you needed? I'm new to the GS area too and am desperately hoping I haven't botched this all too much :-) All best, Go Phightins ! 16:33, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Re your edit summary asking why I linked Radio Free Asia Article and GS/UYGHUR, this is because the current bout of activity on Radio Free Asia began following news about the arrest of RFA journalists reporting in Xinjiang. (The disruption was first brought up at AN/I here.) GS/UYGHUR has been set up as "broadly construed", and given the situation the Radio Free Asia article falls under that broad framework. More specifically, the article also has a "Arrests of Uyghur journalists' relatives" section, which is directly within the topic area. CMD ( talk) 16:53, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
If there is confusion about which content is considered related, the content in question may be marked in the wiki source with an invisible comment.) and comment the subsection. Of course, I will say that as I am involved, I am biased, so I will not go around attempting to challenge your decision.
As for the example of the Gaza media building bombing over at the AP article: ARBPIA "related content" could be invoked for it if there was a dispute concerning that bombing incident (and anything related), but the prevailing practice is not to impose these sort of sanctions preemptively.This makes sense, thanks for explaining. CPCEnjoyer ( talk) 19:38, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
This, because the sensitivity of the subject matter is off the charts.Agreed, though I am not sure how 30/500 will fix it, other than allow two editors, who were previously punished for off-wiki coordination, remove sourced content from the article and stonewall it by not discussing on the talk page. CPCEnjoyer ( talk) 11:50, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
CPCEnjoyer, a couple of things. First, no accusing other editors of hounding or off-wiki coordination without evidence in the form of diffs, please. Not on my talk page, not anywhere. That counts as an WP:ASPERSION. At any event, if that is something you wish to pursue further, you should take it to the relevant noticeboard/project page. But as someone whose 2nd edit was to revert the Radio Free Asia page ( April 10 diff), my sense is that you may be risking a WP:BOOMERANG there. Up to you, though. Regardless, I'd stress that this isn't something I wish to engage, here, on my talk page. Also, toolforge'ing CMD (which I just noticed) in a manner that comes across as too terse to be useful — that is also increasingly giving me WP:DISRUPTSIGNS vibe. Overall, I'm not sure there's further utility to continuing this conversation thread on my talk page at this time. El_C 14:55, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
I fondly remember fondly our previous interactions and am glad to cross paths with you again, even if under somewhat unfortunate circumstances. I just reverted an edit I judged to be vandalism by User:213.175.190.165. It looks like they have a history of vandalism and that you've previously warned you. What should I do in this type of circumstance? Should I alert the involved admin, like I'm doing now, or should I try to handle the situation myself in some way? Be well and stay safe, Benevolent human ( talk) 18:55, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C, since you've been a peacemaker in January / February, I thought I'd bother you again. 2021 storming of the United States Capitol has recently been moved to 2021 United States Capitol attack, but a lot of people (myself included) believe there was no consensus. The move review is still open, but now someone started a new RfC... It looks like we're moving into the same mess we had four or five months ago. As far as I can tell, some of the involved editors are relatively new to Wikipedia, and many of those participating now were not involved in the RMs back then. I think it would be good if an experienced admin could keep an eye on it. If you don't have the time or energy, that's OK. In that case, you could point me to someone/somewhere else I could post a note like this? (I hope this doesn't look like I want to stifle or control the process. I don't. I just wouldn't like to see it devolve into a non-process again.) — Chrisahn ( talk) 19:17, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Could you please close and determine consensus for the discussion at WPTC? There are some additional related comments here. Noah Talk 22:53, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
See [7], [8] and [9]. I guess these articles might get mnre attention now. Doug Weller talk 18:42, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Dear @ El C, hope you're doing well. I wanted to hear an additional opinion and thought about asking it here if you don't mind. I had a long discussion in the Zangezur corridor talk page whether these addition are appropriate or ought to included after every Aliev land claim over Armenia [1] [2] [3]. All the arguments are presented in the discussion, if you can, please take a look. I want another third opinion, and I thought since you were involved with AA topics and that you have alot of experience, asking you was my first choice. I just don't understand why after every Aliev land claim over Armenia, which he has done many times over the years [4] [5] [6] [7] [8], hinting at irredentism (I was told that presumably I can't call those claims "irredentist" if there are no sources saying that it is), there needs to be synthesized and included what seems like an apologia quote from a press conference talk. These additions after every land claim just give the false impression to the reader that Aliev *actually* has no land claims or "territorial claims" over Armenia.
I just find this inclusions of the same apologia quote so bizarre and it troubles me how my fellow editors don't see it that way, and persistently argue to keep it. We're here arguing whether a dictator's territorial claims were "clarified" by him or not from a random press conference, or why it even needs to be synthesized and included in the first place, meanwhile just recently, Azerbaijan already infiltrated parts of Armenia Lake Sev#2021 Armenia–Azerbaijan border crisis.
How are these additions to every Aliev land claim display to the reader how the situation actually is and what Azerbaijan is currently doing.
A) Aliev clearly has history of territorial claims over Armenia, directly a quote from Az president's website from 2014:
"Our development will be continued even more rapidly. Therefore, the issue of restoration of our territorial integrity will be resolved without a doubt. Let no-one have any doubts about that. At the same time, I have repeatedly talked about this and want to say again that the Azerbaijanis must return to all our historical lands in the future. And our historical lands are not limited to Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding regions. If we look at the recent history and the statistics of the 19th century, we can see that the area populated by the Azerbaijanis was very large. The present-day Armenia is actually located on historical lands of Azerbaijan. Therefore, we will return to all our historical lands in the future. This should be known to young people and children. We must live, we live and we will continue to live with this idea." [7]
B) Not only he has claims over Armenian territory (this isn't about Karabakh btw, I'm talking about Armenia proper), but as I showed above, Aliev's already doing it, in Lake Sev most recent and prominent one.
Could you please give your thoughts about this and whether supposed "clarification" ought to be included after every Aliev land claim, when clearly, the reality is a lot more in line with what Aliev actually claims and does. And I feel like this addition by Grandmaster: "We will remember our history, but we have no territorial claims to any country, including Armenia" [1] [2] [3], is just an attempt to false balance and again, doesn't portray what the reality is to the reader.
Many thanks in advance. Regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 14:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
For the record, I was told that other third opinions can be asked, quote from Grandmaster: "I have requested a third opinion from a person who was previously involved with AA topics. Feel free to ask for more third opinions."
I had to think of you when this editor came across my wikipedia experience. You blocked him in August 2020. There is an editor who seems to like the same image as Peacetowikied. The recently blocked had a rather disruptive behavior to term it super-diplomatically. Peacetowikied at least had peace in his username. Anyway, both editors are blocked indef. for now. Paradise Chronicle ( talk) 19:15, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
The Origins of COVID-19 case request you are a party to has been accepted under the name COVID-19 and resolved by motion with one remedy which supersedes the community authorized general sanctions with discretionary sanctions. Sanctions made under the previous community general sanctions are now discretionary sanctions and alerts made under the community GS are now DS alerts. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 23:47, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
Someone from the UK has been obsessively disrupting pages about religions (Islam in Turkey, Islam in Tunusia, Yazdanism, Alevism, Islam...)
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/213.107.66.4
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/80.2.21.124
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/92.234.73.94
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/217.137.42.32
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/213.107.1.41
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/217.137.41.183
They used at least 5 different ips to revert user:KurdeEzidi on a page yesterday. I am reading & contributing on those pages recently ( /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/46.221.85.78) and have been noticing those disruptive ips on many pages about religions.
I suspect that they are probably this blocked ip:
/info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/92.40.183.184
46.221.74.215 ( talk) 08:03, 17 June 2021
I am appealing at /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Astral_Leap_appealing -- Astral Leap ( talk) 09:55, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Sunshine! | |
Hello El C! Interstellarity ( talk) has given you a bit of sunshine to brighten your day! Sunshine promotes WikiLove and hopefully it has made your day better. Spread the sunshine by adding {{subst: User:Meaghan/Sunshine}} to someone else's talk page, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. In addition, you can spread the sunshine to anyone who visits your userpage and/or talk page by adding {{ User:Meaghan/Sunshine icon}}. Happy editing! Interstellarity ( talk) 14:25, 20 June 2021 (UTC) |
Happy first day of summer, El C!! Interstellarity ( talk) 14:25, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you for protecting articles in June, with some impressions of places, flowers and music for you. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:14, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Requesting reduction in protection to "Permanent semi-protected" so we can open up the page to another section of Wikipedia editors. (Added bonus is we are treating it the same as the Labour Party so it wont seem like playing favoritism!) Of course if the sockpuppetry continues, I will have no problem increasing protection permanently again! B. M. L. Peters ( talk) 03:14, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, you indicated in an edit summary that you wanted a reminder to restore indef semi-protection to Ilhan Omar after the one-week protection ended. Firefangledfeathers ( talk) 18:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
....about Omar. I hinted as much when I put on the year's protection. If any further proof was needed: less than half an hour after the full protection expired - in other words while the article was very briefly unprotected - there was another BLP violation by another IP. I even wonder if that article is going to have to go to ECP, but for now I completely agree with indef semi. -- MelanieN ( talk) 23:59, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
81.214.82.158 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Hi El C, got another one here;
Because I reverted his edits at Xiongnu [10], which attempted to push a Turkic origin, completely ignoring the other theories, he proceeded to spam my talk page
[11] same comment here
[12] edit summary; 'no.Because of pan-Iranians like you, Wikipedia's accuracy has declined.'
can i talk u in discord or instagram? can you give it to me if you have an account
-- HistoryofIran ( talk) 20:38, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi
You recently blocked Lenchmobbin ( talk · contribs) for deceptive editing and poor communication, after my nomination. My quick question now is how do I most efficiently undo the damage they did? It would be a lot of work to go through all the articles and figure out what remains of their changes and what needs to be reverted, and since there are intervening edits I would have to do it all manually. Is there a quicker way with some tool or something, or do I just have to suck it up and do it the hard way? Thanks in advance for any help! Knuthove ( talk) 17:02, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
to get serious: ... and the first performance was on a Palm Sunday which is today, and Yoninah's obituary today with the beginning of Passover - putting some little ego-battles in perspective -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:57, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
... and today is the day I want to be praised for having been able to suppress the urge to thank for the TFA ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:33, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() | |
wild garlic |
---|
You may be interested in the TFA on Easter Sunday that played a role in my life! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:28, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
bears and bumble bees— intrigued. El_C 14:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Could you give Hebrew to Psalm 104, please. In the news. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:04, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Fruit of you labour: memories on the Main page today, Psalm 115 thinking of Yoninah, Christa Ludwig and Milva, - voices that made the Earth a better place. Sad that the psalm hook didn't appear on Earth Day as planned, but better pictured and late than going unnoticed ;) - Will work on Psalm 68 when done with the mezzo. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 12:49, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Enjoy two ladies today, one played in an iconic film, the other sang in the premiere of a famous opera, with her husband-to-be ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 16:47, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Today: Kammermusik (Hindemith), - don't miss caricature, "badboy" and the review! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:52, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
Today: Thomas Fritsch, the German voice of Diego in Ice Age. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Today: pictured white and blue - birthday of a friend whose name was in the credits for Ice Age, if you waited a while -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:37, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Today: the lead DYK, "useless but meaningful", or a dream-com-true pictured -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Just FYI - Immediately after your one week protection of Joke Singh expired, newly registered editors were back to vandalising it. I posted the page at WP:RPP. Thanks. 10mmsocket ( talk) 08:28, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I have an old one for you. You blocked this user back in August 2020. They were advised of the standard offer the next day by another admin. See User talk:YashPratap1912#Standard offer
They have been asking for an unblock and getting ignored for some time now. They seem to have expressed an understanding as to why they were blocked and made a clear promise not to engage in the same behavior. They have also described areas that they intend to edit in. They have also gone well over 6 months without visible problematic behavior.
I have had a checkuser confirm that there is no technical evidence of evasion in the last 6 months.
Before doing anything I wanted to consult with you. My understanding is that they were blocked for misusing multiple accounts, possibly in a deletion discussion, though I am having trouble finding the discussion in question. Perhaps you remember the details?
I want to make sure there was nothing egregious like death threats or extended block evasion or anything else that would preclude the standard offer. I also want to know how you personally feel about the matter.
If they are unblocked I will be monitoring their talk page for troubles and have already informed them that they can be reblocked if there is any trouble. Thank you for your time. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 22:52, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, thanks for protecting Jalen Green. I noted that you only protected it until July 3. Given that it has already been protected once this year and was the target of vandalism by multiple IPs in the last few days, none of which will be over until he is actually drafted, I ask that you extend protection until after the NBA draft.-- User:Namiba 13:34, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hi, once again... This disruptive user Лобачев Владимир simply refuses to give up and wants to start a new edit warring at article Pahonia by reinserting already removed information ( HIS EDIT). You gave a warning to stop such malicious activity at this article, but he clearly doesn't care. Can he be finally blocked for his malicious activity? Otherwise, he will obviously perform it again and again, and again because he doesn't care about warnings. He has also recently performed edit warring at article Moldavia ( here is warning to him for 3RR rule violation). He was also warned for disruptive editing already in 2018 ( warning from his talk page). Please finally stop this disruptive user who constantly provokes edit warring and violates various rules of Wikipedia. -- Pofka ( talk) 14:05, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
User talk:Amaan4210 he is removing sourced content continuously without explaining, you can check Pakistan article, I request you to please stop his disruptive edit and block him... Sumit ( talk) 05:07, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I'd like to you look at Fidesz, it seems like the page is under attack by a sockpuppet named SmalforaGiant, a lot of information was added without previous consensus on the talk page. I did revert their edits but some unknown user has reverted them back. I've RPPed the page just in case but again I need someone to take a look. There was also a sockpuppet investigation launched 3 days ago by Martopa here since three different IPs with same edits have been doing this on a couple of different pages. Cheers, -- Vacant0 ( talk) 13:32, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. could you please have a word with Marmandie? Basically, they kept adding nonsensical material to the Ma al-'Aynayn article and edit warring over it. My attempts at trying to explain to them that what they are doing is nonsensical made no difference and now they are adding irrelevant/nationalist content to the article. Thanks. M.Bitton ( talk) 14:08, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Wanna help with a persistent main page error? Just seven bytes to you, but "former" is a powerful word for us. And nice to hear for native Minnesotans, too, probably. InedibleHulk ( talk) 21:37, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
( ←) It was fun while it lasted... now you're just randomly apologizing to Finland for reasons unknown! DanCherek ( talk) 02:47, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Helsinki-is-hot-this-season!.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:15, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Did you not ban User:Michaelm? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moxy ( talk • contribs)
I assume you don't follow the British red tops? They're in one of their periodical feeding frenzies, for reasons I have no interest at all in trying to understand. As usual, it's basically uninformed he said/she said speculation. The Forgers' Gazette has even been running a series on new explanations for the Death of Diana, traditionally the preserve of the Daily Excrement. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Could ye take a look at the history please. Cheers! —— Serial 12:25, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, what is the exact reason of Rojava page protection update? I don't demand decrease. BerkBerk68 ( talk) 21:28, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I want that you see this article once and if I or someone else has made a mistake in editing it, then correct it.(Article- Hajipur ) I want to make this article better, its an request... Thank you... ItsSkV08 ( talk) 03:42, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Hey i see you semi protected Cr1TiKaL and i just wanted to thank you for it. My question is can you make the protection permanent like other youtubers because it seems the protection expires in September. Thank you. MrMclovin ( talk) 04:12, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining. MrMclovin ( talk) 02:14, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, I saw that you declined the page protection request for Evyatar as pre-emptive. I completely agree that is pre-emptive, but respectfully disagree with that as a reason not to protect the page. My understanding of the Arbitration Committee rulings on the Israel-Palestine conflict is that articles related to the conflict are supposed to be given pre-emptive 500/30 protection. Evyatar is an Israeli outpost in the West Bank, which makes it a prime candidate for this protection. If I have misunderstood the rulings then please accept my apologies. RoanokeVirginia ( talk) 13:41, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
RoanokeVirginia, just noting that the settlement was vacated without incident today ( diff), and, not to jinx it, also without incident here on Wikipedia. El_C 16:10, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
This is regarding Manticore ( talk · contribs), and why I didn't full-protect the article instead of partially blocking the two editors reverting each other.
Before partial blocks existed, I would have protected. Nobody likes to be blocked. Even though I know that blocks are only ever placed to prevent disruption and are never punishment and never personal, they still brass people off, because they stay as a permanent record on your user log for ever and ever, with all context for them stripped away.
However, not all administrators agree with this approach. For example, in Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Robert McClenon 2, Iridescent wrote "This [protecting instead of blocking] is directly contrary to both established Wikipedia policy and to custom and practice, in which the only occasions full protection should be considered as a response to a content dispute are multi-party disputes in which so many people are involved that blocking is not a realistic option—remember, every time you protect a page you're preventing everyone from editing it, not just the people involved in the dispute." Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:05, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
I need some help to really leave for my own health, which is not compatible with the en.wp environment. My request: please delete all my empty user-space pages, permanently block me, including throughout my own user space and protect my user space against edits by non-admins. Otherwise, please point me to where I might find an admin who might be prepared to do so. — Quondum 11:00, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
Don't know why, but I seem to recall a while back seeing a "semi-retired" banner on your page. Great to see that it is not so. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia ( talk) 14:22, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
I know you're "not taking requests" at the moment, but since you're more involved in the issue of Volunteer Marek's behavior than anyone else, [14] [15] [16] I'm keeping you appraised:
That's five editors, two ANIs [23] [24] and a lot of time wasted, when his actual contribution to these articles is close to nil. [25] [26] [27]
Cheers. François Robere ( talk) 11:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Hey, El C. Hope you're well. The museum article which the new account added doesn't discuss at all Androutsos's origin - not one word - and they removed a source which discussed their origin. The other new account which is doing the same thing is Mercurius1 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). They're adding random sources to articles and claiming Greek origin for Byzantine emperors, but the sources don't propose Greek origin; in fact they discuss non-Greek backgrounds [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] It should have been mentioned in the summary that their activity is part of a broader behavioral pattern across many articles by specific new accounts and there is no "correct version" to protect, but I still feel that such behavior by new accounts shouldn't get any presence on live versions. These accounts know that their edits will get verified and will get removed sooner or later. The validation they're seeking is to keep their "work" online as much as possible.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 12:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, another IP has repeated the name change on Melinda French Gates that led you to protect the page a few days ago, shortly after the protection expired today. Can you renew the protection? ― Tartan357 Talk 00:06, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
LOL what exactly do they think they'll get out of a spam edit summary. SMDH. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:17, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, could you semi-protect List of presidents of Myanmar? Thanks. ― Tartan357 Talk 02:11, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
The Battle of Kosovo article was semi-protected indefinitely a few days ago due to disruption by IPs. Since then, there have been new rounds of reverting cycles. Today, new user Istinar breached WP:3RR by making 4 reverts. Can you keep an eye on the article or put a short full-protection, or maybe place a short message on that editor's tp? To be clear, I am not involved in the current dispute, just have the article on my watchlist. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 13:09, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
I just noticed that you blocked Istinar ( talk · contribs) from a page in the WP:ARBMAC space. They have also recently added a fair bit of toxicity at Talk:Denial of the genocide of Serbs in the Independent State of Croatia, so you might want to examine applying more sanctions to enforce the rules of decorum. I am involved, because I tried to reason with them; silly me. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 19:52, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
I was going to do a full protection on this as many of the accounts involved are 500+ but it's a nightmare and I didn't want to protect the wrong version!! There's been canvassing on and off en-wiki (one sided, from what I see currently) on this article as is seen here. I also placed a canvass banner on the talk page discussion which has more drive by participation on both sides. I blocked a couple of accounts (one incorrectly as sock, it was an off-wiki canvassed meatpuppet) Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Emdad Tafsir/Archive. There's another really old sock farm on the other side too, with a couple of recently blocked socks. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rajputbhatti/Archive. — Spaceman Spiff 13:16, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Hey navjyot ? I did nothing ? This is not a white washing campaign . It's not someone's personal blog , this is Wikipedia we have to maintain the neutrality which your article was unable to . Please don't do this Maaz143 ( talk) 21:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
It's postmodern multimedia deconstructive commentary. E Eng 20:39, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. You WP:GOLD protected 2022 Punjab Legislative Assembly election for a week at the end of June, but the same editors have returned to reverting each other now that the protection has worn out. One of the editors involved did post something on the article talk page, but that never got a response and only led to more reverts. Would you mind taking a look at this again? Perhaps a "last warning" from an administrator to those involved might finally encourage them to start discussing their differences instead of just reverting each other. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 05:19, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi can you please review and fix Economy of Pakistan article since this edit [38] by @Mohammad Adnon Khan article is not showing properly on mobile version. Ytpks896 ( talk) 11:55, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I need guidance with someone who is trying to get around the revert rule by using different addresses.
An IP editor returns periodically to
List of accolades received by Carol (film) to make the same disruptive edit using a different IP address each time. It's been done 6 times as of today. I first issued a warning on
3 July 2021, and today a second one,
12 July 2021. This time I added the following to the template: "Whether it is as IP 2601:1c0:c700:3030:7844:6361:113b:7708 ; 2601:1c0:c700:3030:f81d:132d:b3a6:324 ; 2601:1c0:c700:3030:f88d:3db7:5498:7ce1 ; 2601:1c0:ce00:4b70:892:2fde:7119:bdd2 ; 2601:1c0:ce00:4b70:702f:48e0:c204:763 ; or now 2601:1c0:ce00:4b70:6988:a42a:30ef:9b64 — this is the same IP editor making the same disruptive edits." Never explains what row is being changed, and never explains the reason for the change. How is a one-track-mind editor like this stopped?
Pyxis Solitary
(yak). L not Q.
10:12, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for how you handled the Adamant1 ani case, you could have chosen a harsher verdict but you decided to be kind about it . On their behalf I want to thank you for that. Celestina007 ( talk) 14:10, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
I understand the ban of the wikiproject. Can you delete all the pages related to our wikiproject? Thanks (Participants and Template link etc, I can send links if its necessary.). BerkBerk68 ( talk) 20:35, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Please take notice and go to /info/en/?search=Talk:Blackjack to read “Informal Motion to Remove All References Placed by Objective3000 in Blackjack, Card counting, Martingale (betting system), and Shuffle track and Wherever They May Also Appear in Wikipedia Articles to His Self-published Commercial Websites qfit and blackjackincolor and Others Not Identified.” This Notice of Informal Motion is also placed as a courtesy at the user talk pages of those who have shown interest in the subject, namely, TransporterMan, Orangemike, QFIT, El C, and Rray.
Extended content.
El_C
22:24, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
|
---|
The Informal Motion is placed, as per request by Rray, on the talk page of Blackjack and in addition on those of Card counting, Martingale (betting system), and Shuffle track. Because El C is the user who convicted me and sentenced me (Editing from 2600:1700:5651:2780:0:0:0:0/64 has been blocked (disabled) by El C), I respectfully take the liberty of providing additional information here. Disclosures. Apparently using an IP address to contribute is a violation, so I have adopted the screen name of Aabcxyz. All my statements are supported by evidence, which I present at the said talk pages. In the comments that follow I provide additional evidence in parentheses. For the benefit of El C as well as for that of all who read this, a user has volunteered to review my comments before I post them to ensure that no further violation of wikipedia rules inadvertently occurs. Issue #1. On June 19, El C put a stop of my editing resulting from allegations posted by Objective3000 using an ID other than Objective3000. The allegations were 1) vandalism, 2) use of multiple IP accounts, 3) a third allegation using Wikipedia jargon to which I am not familiar. This was a star chamber proceeding, not allowing a defense and not providing the identity of the plaintiff, here the accuser. Because I had removed citations to the self-published webpages of Objective3000, it was a direct conclusion that he had filed the complaint, verified by looking at his user log, in which Objective3000 used a different user ID. (Evidence: 19 June 2021 IP vandalism • Card counting (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) • Blackjack (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Temp semi-protection: Persistent vandalism. 16 or so repeated deletions in the last week by multiple related IPs. Refusal to go to TP. O3000, Ret. (talk) 14:20, 19 June 2021 (UTC) /info/en/?search=File:Stop_x_nuvola_with_clock.svg User(s) blocked. El_C 16:23, 19 June 2021 (UTC) ) Concerning allegation 1, I removed multiple references put in place by Objective3000 (the evidence for this allegation appears at Blackjack and Card counter talk pages) as self-published web pages with commercial content. Only one other edit, to improve the quality of Blackjack was made. I considered the removal of citations one of cleansing rather than vandalism; no actual informative page content was removed. Concerning allegation 2 by Objective3000, the evidence (log of my edits at the two pages) not only does not support the allegation but DIRECTLY REFUTES IT. I can respectfully suggest that these weak and verifiably false allegations should not have passed muster for conviction. I take note that Objection3000 uses at least two other ID’s, O3000 (Talk of Card counting, section 24, O3000 (talk) 20:34, 17 November 2017) and O3000, Ret. (User talk:Objective3000 ; O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:17, 10 January 2021 (UTC)) If an allegation of use of “multiple IP accounts” is grounds for being banned, then certainly use of three is grounds, unless there is something I don’t understand (highly likely) or the rules of Wikipedia are to be construed arbitrarily and capriciously. I also take note that Rray had not worked on Wikipedia since May 30, 2021, when he quizzically, of the millions of articles on Wikipedia, decided to visit Blackjack and Card counting on June 14, 2021, to reverse my deletions of citations placed by Objective3000 to his self-published webpages, with the comment to “assume good faith.” He also commented on Card counting, “These references have been here for years.” If there is a statute of limitations relevant to violations of WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS (see Issue #4 below), it might be put forth as an affirmative defense, but I have found nothing in Wikipedia rules to that effect. Issue #2: One of my actions was to delete at Blackjack under Blackjack Literature a link placed by Objective3000 to his webpage “book.” That was reversed. On consideration, Rray validated my concern and removed the link based on “This doesn't really fit in with the rest of the books on this list for obvious reasons.” (22:15 15 June 2021). That justification was articulated by me on my act of removal: Blackjack literature: self-promotion of commercial website; not a peer-reviewed book like all the others cited; shameful abuse of WP for self-advertising (1:29 12 June 2021). In light of Rray’s deletion, which stands, that act does not constitute vandalism in the eyes of other users. Issue #3. The evidence shows that before 8/31/2007, no citations to Objective3000’s self-published commercial webpages existed on Blackjack, Card counting, Hole carding, and Martingale (betting system), and Shuffle track. After that date, the evidence shows that Objective3000 inserted citations to his self-published webpages with commercial content, namely, qfit and blackjackincolor, more than once a month in the next six months. At the talk pages of Blackjack and Card counting the evidence that ten such insertions were made by Objective3000 is presented. Under the doctrine of argumentum ad ignorantiam, I cannot say whether others subsequently inserted such citations in these or other webpages, but the evidence is irrefutable that a) Objective3000 inserted such citations to the five articles in the six months after he became active, b) NO OTHER user had inserted citations in the five articles to either of these self-published webpages BEFORE he became active, and c) NO OTHER user inserted such citations to any of these articles during the six month period examined. Issue #4. It was interesting to find that currently Hole carding lacks the two citations to Objective3000’s self-published websites that he had placed on 12/24/2007 (see Blackjack for evidence). A search through the log shows that from 23 December 2010 through 27 December 2010 two users tried to remove references that Objective3000 had placed to his websites. (See Issue #5 and Hole carding talk page for Evidence.) On 27 December 2010 user TransporterMan began a discussion with Objection3000 based on the merits of citations inserted by Objection3000 to qfit and blackjackincolor being in violation of both WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS.. TransporterMan noted the following on the talk page of Hole carding: “Let me note in passing, however, that the links being removed appear to me to be very iffy as reliable sources to support the assertions in the article. TransporterMan (TALK) 14:43, 27 December 2010.” The rest of the discussion appears on the talk page of Hole carding, including his opinion that WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS are being violated and that a referral to Reliable Sources Noticeboard about these sources would substantiate his opinion, stating “I'm fairly certain of my analysis and the probable outcome.” To summarize, TransporterMan finds fault lies in Objective3000 not being an expert according to the Wikipedia definition “Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. None of Objective3000’s “work,” using his actual name as provided on his commercial webpages, has either been published as a peer-reviewed journal contribution, been accepted for presentation as a paper at a scholarly meeting (Evidence: google scholar, https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/authors.html), or has not been published in book form by reliable third-party publications (Evidence: amazon.com search). One may conjecture, sine testimonio, that Objective3000’s not pursuing the matter with TransporterMan was a case of discretion over valor: The Hole carding article has about 50 daily visits, whereas Blackjack and Card counting together have about 2300 daily visits, 50 times more traffic. A determination that the citations to qfit and Blackjackincolor violated the doctrines of WP:SOURCES and WP:SPS would be global rather than local, meaning that such citations would necessitate removal from ALL wikipedia articles. Apparently, an appeal to the Reliable Sources Noticeboard committee suggested by TransporterMan was pursued by neither Meisner nor Objective3000. Such a determination for removal, the probable outcome according to TransporterMan, would have been dispositive. Issue #5. The evidence shows that others have disputed the appropriateness of Objective3000’s citations to this self-published webpages. I was not the first. The evidence in the TransporterMan discussion indicates one such user. In Fred Bauder’s personal page, User_talk:Fred_Bauder#Conflict_of_Interest.2FAdvertising.2FContentiousness, there is evidence of two others, Mr. Bauder himself and a user referred to by Objective3000 (Objective3000 (talk) 14:22, 6 September 2011), wherein Objective3000 refers to the banning of the user. In Hole carding, two users removed the references placed by Objective3000. One got banned for life. (Evidence presented at Hole carding.) In four instances, including mine, the modus operandi of Objective3000 is to begin the process of getting those objectors banned from editing for vandalism or other causes. Under the doctrine of argumentum ad ignorantiam, I cannot say whether other users have found citations to qfit and blackjackincolor inappropriate and whether Objective3000 files claims of vandalism or other causes against them to get them banned, but the implication survives on its own merits. In such cases, judging from the editing histories of these four users, the objectors are new users on Wikipedia and fell prey to violation of its guidelines as alleged by Objection3000 to protect his citations. That was certainly the situation in my regard. Issue #6. On June 19, 2021, Objective3000 posted a message asking that Blackjack and Card counting be given protected status. This action is taken to cease inappropriate editing on controversial articles, articles about celebrities and political figures, and the such, not to ensure that Objective3000’s citations to his self-published webpages with commercial content be preserved. Both Blackjack and Card counting have the lowest ranking of completed article, C-class, the editing needs of which are described as “Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems.” Yet, Objective3000 wanted both protected. |
In consideration of the above, I will respectfully continue to seek the following relief by any and all means appropriate and legal under Wikipedia guidelines: a) Removal of citations to Objective3000’s self-published webpages with commercial content globally and prohibition of additional citations being made by any user to the self-published webpages with commercial content, or, in the interests of a settlement, b) retention of the citations but under the condition that all commercial advertising be therein removed by Objective3000 or his agent, including but not restricted to banner ads and links to software sale sites complete with pricing, such a settlement requiring a published waiver of their policy from the Reliable Sources Noticeboard committee concerning establishment of expert standing and other relevant criteria for posting of references to self-published material. Aabcxyz ( talk) 22:07, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
Floquenbeam, the title of my post was originally "Informal Motion to Remove All References Placed by Objective3000 in Blackjack, Card counting, and Shuffle track and Wherever They May Also Appear in Wikipedia Articles to His Self-published Commercial Websites qfit and blackjackincolor." The Informal Motion appears at Blackjack. Since you requested more detail, I will copy what I originally posted here at your user_talk. Thanks for your interest in keeping articles free of commercial content. Aabcxyz ( talk) 22:51, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Aabcxyz
It may be my imagination -- but I don't think this person likes me. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 16:31, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Can’t believe I missed this. The IP range that you temp blocked is in Oak Park, Ill. This is the home of an editor with a dozen socks [44]. This is one of the AfDs over articles about himself written by these socks. [45] He also attempted to add material about himself to the blackjack page back then. I took part in that AfD ten years ago and he spent months hounding me, by phone, email, and other sites. I removed personal info about myself from my user page as a result. That was ten years ago and he quoted that diff two days ago on the blackjack TP. I’m uncomfortable filing an SPI as the target of his attacks. I suppose I could go to Beeblebrox, who participated in the AfD, the SPI, and is a CU. O3000, Ret. ( talk) 12:10, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C! Regarding your decision to only temporarily protect WT:Article wizard, I can't help but see this as just unnecessarily kicking the can down the road. There's no reason to think that newcomers will somehow stop making test edits two years from now, and every reason to think they'll resume just the same as they resumed as soon as the previous protection expired, creating more work for vandalism patrollers and for whoever sets up the next round of protection. It's unfortunate that the gigantic {{ Talkpage of help}} notice isn't enough to stop the junk, but that's the situation. Newcomers will still have the Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/feedback page (linked from a banner on the wizard talk page) to give feedback. Other talk pages in similar positions such as Help talk:Introduction have been indefinitely semi'd, and as I said in my request, I really think that's the clear best course of action here. {{u| Sdkb}} talk 00:13, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C, hope you're doing well. Would you like to reinstate semi-protection at the Battle of Saragarhi article now that the full protection has expired? DanCherek ( talk) 13:53, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello El C.I am sorry to bother You.An user named Advaita222 is involved in edit war in the Baidya page.In spite of my invitation to talk page,He is continuously reverting the consensus version.The version was approved by one of our Senior editors Ekdalian ckeck it here.I have warned him.Can You please help me to handle this.Thanks.Regards. Abhishek Sengupta 24 ( talk) 14:21, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello. A while back you were asking for a archive of WP:ARCA requests. Although it is not complete and will still take a few weeks for me to finish, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Index/Clarification and Amendment requests is an index of all clarification and amendment requests excluding requests moved elsewhere (such as to AE) or requests removed without consideration by the arbitrators. It contains the a link to case or decision affected, a permalink to the request, the date the request was opened, the date the request was closed, and finally relevant links which is currently only permalinks to any enacted motion in the request. Hopefully this is useful. As it's currently being worked on it's not yet linked to from other places, but I plan to un-orphan the page once all entries are backfilled. After the index is complete there may be other improvements made to the archiving process for ARCA requests. Hope this index is useful. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 22:31, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, can you indef ECP Isaac Herzog? He's the president of Israel, WP:A/I/PIA really should be applied. ― Tartan357 Talk 05:14, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
The sig says 15:08 but the edit history says 15:09 so.... Best, Barkeep49 ( talk) 15:15, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
I'd completely forgotten about the paid editor making a complaint. There are plenty of other reviewers who will handle their future submissions. I don't check who the creating editor is when I make a review, though. I just look at quality of the draft. I imagine they would like their payment. That tends to mean they must do their work well enough for articles to be accepted.
On the rare occasions I get dragged to ANI I tend to let my edits speak for themselves. There is little point in mounting a defence because the defence is already present in the history concerned, and folk will make whatever judgements they choose, as is their right. It is also the right fo any editor who feels the need to take any other editor there. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 06:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
I would like to ask that you restore the original version of the article without the added category. User:Jaydoggmarco added the Category:Anti-vaccination activists to the article on June 16th as shown on this revision. [ [46]] It was reverted several times by other editors and IPs before I stepped in and gave my two cents. It was fine for over a month before Jaydoggmarco (who has been wikihounding me for basically his entire edit history since early June [ [47]]) decides to revert it again. Of course since contentious changes such as that must be discussed first on the talk page as opposed to just adding them and reverting, I opened up a discussion. It went unanswered until yesterday, despite my constantly explaining I wanted to discuss. Calton stated "nobody works for you" and reverted without adding anything to the discussion section. [ [48]] I feel that it is appropriate to have the original version of the article prior to the change be the version that is protected, at least until a consensus can be reached. Thank you for taking the time to read this. TJD2 ( talk) 06:55, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Something is going on L. Murugan page, seems to be a heavy vandalism, maybe protection for the page is needed for few days, please look into this matter Nahtrav ( talk) 12:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
I believe On both Covid 19 and Covid 19 Pandemic articles that extended confirmed protection is not necessary. Natadmim ( talk) 14:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Dear @ El C, would you mind giving your input as a third party on Talk:Lavash#Recent revert page? We have a dispute with regard to which wording is more appropriate. The editor I'm having a dispute with, @ Wikaviani, also pinged two other editors for third opinion. There's also a need to clarify whether pinging an editor who gave you a barnstar would breach WP:CANVASSING and WP:THIRD. The second editor they pinged tries to convince me it doesn't, but I'm not sure. Thanks in advance. Best regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 08:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the compliment El C, not sure what I have done to deserve it. I guess Wikaviani's ping did not work, seeing how I did not receive a notice. As for Lavash, meh, I see
reliable sources stating both origins, no need to give
undue weight to one or the other.
PS:Has ZaniGiovanni been notified of AA2 sanctions on their talk page? I see that after coming off a one week block their first edit was to make a revert on an AA2 article. --
Kansas Bear (
talk)
17:11, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
I have been editing Wikipedia since 2007 and this discussion closure may have been the most inspiring and beautiful thing I have ever seen. BOTTO ( T• C) 23:54, 18 July 2021 (UTC) |
Hi, it seems since your protection of That Vegan Teacher expired a few days ago, the number of vandalism incidents has increased again. Could you have another look whether protection is needed per WP:BLP? Thanks -- hroest 14:56, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
I do, in fact, see what you did there. ;) theleekycauldron ( talk • contribs) ( they/them) 17:58, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello :) I am writing my MA dissertation on Wikipedia Wars and the Israel-Palestine conflict, and I noticed that you have contributed to those pages. My dissertation will look at the process of collaborative knowledge production on the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the effect it has on bias in the articles. This will involve understanding the profiles and motivations of editors, contention/controversy and dispute resolution in the talk pages, and bias in the final article.
For more information, you can check out my meta-wiki research page or my user page, where I will be posting my findings when I am done.
I would greatly appreciate if you could take 5 minutes to fill out this quick survey before 8 August 2021.
Participation in this survey is entirely voluntary and anonymous. There are no foreseeable risks nor benefits to you associated with this project.
Thanks so much,
Sarah Sanbar
Sarabnas I'm researching Wikipedia Questions? 20:19, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Ok, maybe I was exaggerating with many
, I had just become weary of all the disruption. Thanks for the protection anyways.
IronManCap (
talk)
21:56, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
This made me laugh--thanks for the help. Alyo ( chat· edits) 23:09, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, how have you been? I need you to give an opinion, if/when time permits. I asked on June 14 @ Joy: on their talk page to give me an opinion about or help to deal with a disruptive editor. Joy did not respond. Yesterday you blocked that disruptive editor indefinitely. Since Joy did not react at all to my post on their talk page, I removed it [49]. I wrote in the edit summary "Indefinitely blocked by an admin. When someone asks for sth, the most humane and civilized way is to respond, even with a simple "I cant help". Joy insists that I insulted him, though I told him that I was not saying that Joy is not humane or civilized, and that I did not want to insult him. What I meant with the edit summary is that when someone asks your for sth, the most humane and and civilized thing to do is to not ignore, but to give a response (even a "I can't help you"). I also told him I know he is not obliged to help me. However, Joy insists that I should learn English and that I insulted him. I ask you as an experienced admin who has given help to both Joy and myself: should my edit summary be seen as an insult to Joy? If so, can the edit summary be deleted? Ktrimi991 ( talk) 18:25, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I have a question for you. I don't think the ANI complaint by Fram is justified or should to me being indefed. Since it's clearly retaliation because I wouldn't answer him how and when he wanted me to. Nothing I have done that led to this or the last complaint has been anywhere on par of the behavior that caused the original block either. I've made a lot of progress since then. It's obvious people just want to get me blocked though and I was planning on appealing if I get indefed.
That said, I do feel like I could use a break from this for my own mental health. The general level of toxicity I've been dealing with lately and things going on IRL have been causing me some hardcore anxiety that I just can't be 100% solid due to right now. And I realize I'm going to keep having issues if I'm not able to be 100% solid about things. So I wanted to propose a six month block to cool down, reflect on what led to this, and work on my IRL issues. Realistically, even if the ANI complaint doesn't lead to an indef I still want to step away for a while and cool down. So is there a way to propose a six month block or have it happen without it seeming like I'm trying to weasel out of a permanent block or bludging the process? -- Adamant1 ( talk) 08:21, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
Not trying to be mean, but did you really need to fully protect Hyatt Regency walkway collapse? Why were you so quick to press the 'fully protect' button when extended confirmed lock or auto-confirmed lock would've been much better to use? I know it's an edit war.. but it's literally just mainly IPs.. and it's not a BLP article or a very pressing issue. I fail to see why a full protect is needed here. wizzito | say hello! 22:27, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
We edit conflicted before your ping.
![]() |
Talk:Cleveland Guardians got separated from Cleveland Indians. Cards 84664 14:21, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
You recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics/Evidence. Please add your evidence by August 6, 2021, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Iranian_politics/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Moneytrees🏝️ Talk/ CCI guide 18:41, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
I noticed that their op-eds are really not on par with their news, but there likely are other sources, — Paleo Neonate – 07:59, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
The institute was carrying out experiments using chimeric viruses with modified spike proteins, tested on mice with respiratory cells genetically altered to resemble those of humans. The goal was to see which were more infective. These experiments were written into grant applications, including for U.S. funds; the research began in 2014-2015 and was underway at the institute through 2019. The work was not done in the highest biosecurity level laboratory. (from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/07/23/china-is-stepping-up-its-deception-denial-investigations-covid-19/)
spreading disinformation that it came from a U.S. military laboratory.I doubt the Washington Post editorial board is that easy to fool, but maybe...? They certainly do not seem to be as science-silly as certain other editorial boards of major newspapers that also start with the letter W. As for the US funding angle, I suppose we'll see whether the Biden admin's appetite for investigating COVID's origins will extend to when Biden, himself, was VP... El_C 10:09, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
Many of the arguments re: how genetic engineering is relevant to the pandemic or its origins are missing the point. As I described in some more detail over at the GoFR talk page, it doesn't even necessarily matter whether the WIV was trying to make GoFR viruses (and it is heavily disputed). If the relevant experts who understand how to analyze virus genomes have said SARS-COV-2 was extremely likely not engineered, based on their analysis of the genome, its spread, the biochemistry, etc. then we should trust what they say in peer-reviewed secondary literature reviews published in scientific journals, [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] over what the Washington Post editorial board says.
This editorial also made some key statements, that proclaim certain experiments involving viruses collected from bats were "gain of function." What they leave out, is that there is significant debate among the relevant experts about whether or not those experiments, in fact, qualify... What follows is more detail about that.
There are experts who have come down on both sides of whether or not there was "Gain-of-function research"
|
---|
Richard Ebright (emeritus professor at Rutgers who is a bacteriologist and biosafety researcher) told The Washington Post that he thinks they qualify: [6]
The EcoHealth Alliance's position (The US-based Nonprofit who subcontracted the sampling of bat viruses in the grant proposal to the WIV), as described by their spokesperson, believes it does not count: [6]
MIT molecular biologist Alina Chan (also pro-lab leak, interestingly) has argued that these experiments would not have been affected by the 2014 moratorium: [7]
Many scientists have thoughts on both sides, but the entire scientific community was in uproar when this grant was rescinded due to political pressure. [8] Scientists really hate when you overtly mix politics with their science. The grant was later reinstated due to this uproar. [9] [10] Scientists of different persuasions of whether it "counted" were also upset about the lack of transparency in the review process, about whether or not research "counts." They want those reviewing panels to be more open. Notable examples include Angela Rasmussen and David Relman. [11] |
And what about the controversial Menachery et al paper in 2015, about SHC014?
|
---|
There's also been questions raised about a 2015 paper that was a collaboration between the Baric lab and Zhengli's lab at the WIV, which could be what the editorial board is referring to here. [12] Importantly, this paper involved pseudoviruses (which cannot replicate and are more similar to vaccines than bioweapons). Any expert on viruses could tell you that this was not gain-of-function, because pseudoviruses cannot function as viruses. [13] All they do is get into a cell, they cannot make more of themselves or, most importantly, get out of the cell. Ralph Baric, who was lead author on that paper, does not believe that work qualified: [6]
There aren't really a lot of reliable sources describing experts who believe it did qualify. At least none I could find published in RSes. Baric's lab did also infect transgenic mice with the virus, but only in ways that fundamentally did not increase the ability of the virus to replicate or infect human cells. [14] Mostly because the natural virus could already do it! "Gain-of-function" refers to when a virus is enabled to replicate more inside human hosts. Not when it is simply already able to infect them, and scientists show this. The NIH ultimately determined this did not fall under the 2014 research moratorium. [15] |
And were they working with viruses at dangerously "unprotected" biosafety conditions?
|
---|
The MIT Technology Review article I cited in the preceding collapse suggests there is something wrong with the fact that Baric's lab conducted experiments with this virus at BSL3, whereas Zhengli's lab at the WIV handled them at BSL2: This argument is leaving out an extremely important aspect, though: This is exactly what the CDC's Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories manual recommends that we do! [16] The Technology Review omission makes sense, because they do not have PhDs in virology or biosafety etc. SHC014 has never shown any propensity for causing disease in humans. Biosafety reviews by IBC committees (at the WIV and UNC) have likely determined that it is safe to handle them in vitro (outside animals) at BL2 and in vivo (in animals) at BSL3+ (although we are not privy to these institutional panel discussions, only independent scientists and community members around the institution are in attendance). What I can tell you for sure, though, is that this sort of stepping down in intensity of biosafety controls is an extremely common practice. It's what we do for all sorts of families of viruses, as standard operating procedure in virology, all around the world. By the way, we also handle those bat-like coronaviruses at BSL-2 in vitro here in the United States. [17] We do this stepping down in intensity for many different viruses. Tamiami virus (a close relative of Lassa virus), Ross River virus (a close relative of Semliki Forest virus), or non-neurovirulent strains (e.g. Kunjin) of West Nile all come to mind. All of these are examples of viruses closely related to BSL-3 and 4 viruses that are themselves handled at BSL-2 (and BSL-2+) because they lack a concerning virulence in humans. |
Here's a more personal example from me to you, to help explain the proper biosafety conditions for these pathogens
|
---|
To help illustrate this point, we do the same sort of stepping down in biosafety with hantaviruses, and it was exactly how I handled hantaviruses during my PhD. If the virus has never been shown to infect humans or, specifically, cause disease in humans, but we have evidence that people have generated antibodies against it... [18] (as they also have for these coronaviruses) [19] then we're pretty darn sure it doesn't infect healthy immunocompetent humans. [20] And so in grad school, I handled those non-human pathogenic hantaviruses at BSL-2 or BSL-2+ in petri dishes (e.g. Thottapalayam, Tula, and Prospect Hill viruses), just like how many other researchers at other institutions in the United States do it. [21] [22] Even though the closely related Andes virus and Sin Nombre virus kill 30% of the patients they infect, and are aerosol-transmitted! [23] [24] Scary, right??? Well that's probably why, when I worked with these viruses, [25] I did so at BSL3 and BSL3+. Wearing masks and double gloves and a gown and goggles and a tyvek suit, [26] in a negative air-pressure room, which directed all air in the entire room into HEPA filters in the ceiling. [27] Inside a laminar flow hood that directed all air immediately into HEPA. [28] Whenever we transported samples, we did so inside two air-tight containers, in case anything were ever dropped, so there would be no question of accidental release. When transported by mail, there had to be a third outside air-tight container. When we infected animals with these viruses, we did so at a BSL4 in Montana. Wearing space suits. With a chemical shower at every exit. [29] We were periodically inspected by the CDC at both facilities. I had to write up a biological risk assessment citing every aspect of the disease, and the risk it posed, and the mitigation strategies we had in place, with in-line citations, that was reviewed by both the CDC and our in-house biosafety committee. I had to answer questions about my mental status, any medications I take, etc. And keep at home a kit with a mask, gloves, suit, and goggles. If I ever got sick, I was supposed to put these things on, so that I wouldn't transmit the infection to the paramedics in the ambulance that would come get me, or the physicians and nurses that would take care of me in the E.R. and transport me into an isolation room. |
Okay, smart guy, what about the WIV?
|
---|
Before you say "that's an awful lot of "I"s in that preceding collapse, you should know these are all international standards in high level biosafety with dangerous pathogens. [30] [31] [32] And, we even know that French experts helped set up the WIV's BSL3 and 4 facilities, and inspected them, along with the ISO, who also certify American BSL4 labs. [33] [34] [35] Biosecurity researchers here in the US helped train the researchers there. [36] [37] |
So why do we do that, handle the closely related non-human pathogenic viruses at a lower biosafety level?
|
---|
We do it because biosafety work is difficult, slow, and expensive. And we actually know that too many biosafety controls is also dangerous. Studies have shown that over-gowning physicians and nurses can lead to more infections, because they become fatigued more easily and disrobe and put on the equipment more carelessly. These are the single most important moments in biosafety. How you put on and take off the gear. There are reams and reams of books published about the best way to do this. It's a founding principle of biosafety, that we should not overburden with too many controls. Otherwise, there will be a slow creep towards putting the most expansive and restrictive protections on every experiment. Instead, we put the apropriate amount of biosafety for each experiment. This allows experiments to be conducted more easily (plaque assays, antibody inhibition assays, flow cytometry of cells, etc. which are all quite frustrating to conduct at BSL-3 and 4) which enables faster generation of treatments and vaccines. Of course, eventually, the findings are later replicated on the real-deal human pathogenic viruses, but at the appropriately higher biosafety level. Doing the experiments first on closely related viruses that are more easily (and still safely) handled at BSL-2 (and BSL-2+) means less time is wasted at BSL3 or 4, and that BSL3 and 4 work is conducted more safely. |
TL;DR
|
---|
I don't want you to think I don't have any concerns about the WIV and whether these viruses escaped from a lab. I do have those concerns. I want it to be investigated more deeply, I want China to open up, etc. But what I want to make abundantly clear to you is that there is a lot of misinformation flowing around about these laboratories, their experiments, etc. Often from sources who do not have the necessary expertise to evaluate the claims they make. Can you imagine how frustrating this is? Imagine you were a plumber, and you visit some guy's house, to clear a clogged pipe. And the guy sidles up to you, and elbows you and says "Hello fellow plumbologist. I see you got your snake there, for clearin' clogs...have you ever considered that the lil scratches you make on the sides of the pipe there could actually be serving as nucleation sites for future clogs to form? What if you're actually the one who's causing this clog? Maybe you should pay for it, too, huh?" I don't provide this analogy to say the lab leak is "impossible" like this B.S. plumbing analogy. I provide it to say: this is what it feels like to be constantly in conversations with people who have never set foot in a biosecurity lab, but feel as though they know enough about it to ascertain it is "extremely likely" or in some cases "99% likely" that this virus leaked from a lab. I think it's "unlikely, but requires more investigation" like most virologists. I do not think this op-ed adds anything to that conversation that has not already been hashed out in extreme detail elsewhere, by topic experts. I do not think it adds anything to how we should cover these topics on Wikipedia. I do think we could probably cover more of what I have detailed above in articlespace, but only where it is not WP:OR or WP:UNDUE. The SHC014 controversy, for example, could probably get a paragraph in Gain of function research. But only when included in an NPOV way, that depicts the mainstream scientific view. Like we do with all topics, but especially fringe topics. |
Sources
|
---|
References
|
I'm sorry, I know this is long. but there really is a lot of detail here. The length of detail should be instructive, because it shows a great example of why the WP:OR and WP:SOURCETYPES policies are so important. For some of these debates, a PhD really really helps one understand the intricate details. And we need multiple scientists peer-reviewing each other in how to assess these intricate details. That's why I think discussions of scientific theories like whether or not an experiment qualifies as "gain-of-function" or not, is something we should only source to peer-reviewed literature review articles published in reliable topic-relevant journals!-- Shibbolethink ( ♔ ♕) 18:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)(edited 18:28, 24 July 2021 (UTC))
Can you please tell me why my editing rights are invoked for the article List of converts to Islam from Hinduism? You can read about my edits here. -- Bringtar ( talk) 12:54, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Last year's flowers match the image on the user page nicely, see? - DYK that her last reply to me was in a thread Green for hope? - The DYK set for Yoninah will appear tomorrow, including Psalm 85, with the kiss of justice and peace. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:09, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Shit happens. Music happens. On the Main page now: "my" school. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 15:28, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
This article is being completely revised(result, figures, etc, etc.) [55] [56] by an IP hopping editor. Anyway you could protect it? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 16:36, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
I am not involved in that content dispute, but from a quick look I see it is not going well. While the article is under full protection, the talk page is having highly inflammatory and insulting comments. I am leaving this note, as you might want to leave a civility reminder or a DS template on that tp. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 12:15, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
My pinging of you didn't send. I've responded on my talk page. -- WikiCleanerMan ( talk) 20:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
I have retracted the smear accusation from Talk:Prosperity theology. tgeorgescu ( talk) 04:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is
User:Alalch Emis. Thank you.
VQuakr (
talk)
19:06, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
I suppose it's possible the user is aware that I was JIMBO'd in 2009, since, after all, I link prominently to my block log on my userpage. What they may not be aware of is WP:BLOCKABDICATE. Bishonen | tålk 11:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC).
Has been keeping me amused every time I have to wade into that cesspit. Please keep it up. That place needs more levity, and editors like you, EEng and Martinevans are doing God's work.
(And yes, I know what the notification of this looked like, given the title, heh heh). ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 14:20, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
For your interventions in the COVID-19 'lab leak' topic area, and the COVID-19 topic area more generally, last year and early this year. Doesn't go unnoticed! ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 10:20, 29 July 2021 (UTC) |
Could you revdel [ this] edit summary? I pasted by I meant to copy. 92.5.2.97 ( talk) 15:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
El C, if time permits, can you take a look? @ InNeed95: was blocked by @ EdJohnston: two days ago, after I warned them for the misuse of the word "vandalism" when referring to good faith edits made by other editors. After the block expired, InNeed95 insisted on my tp that they were right [57]. On their own tp, they called the block "incorrect charge", defended the misuse of the term "vandalism" and called the blocking admin "incompetent". They did not reflect even after another editor told them that the block was a right action and that the "incompetent admin" comment was a personal attack [58]. What do you think? This editor claims that the situation needs a review. Is this editor suitable for editing controversial Balkan topics? Ktrimi991 ( talk) 20:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
This is the thing, Ktrimi991: that preface notwithstanding, once you've posted the request here, the user who is the subject of the complaint responded to it, then you respond to their response, then they respond to that, and so on. You've sort of put me on the spot where I feel obliged to at the very least glance it and say something, if only to prevent that conversation from just going and going, here, on my talk page. El_C 23:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
sth? Typo? El_C 23:35, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
@
El C:
Greetings User:El C,
I appreciate your will to help. As you said yourself, you dont really have time to review the problem. That is of course understandable. I just want to point out that User:Ktrimi991 claims the whole time that I am defending the use of the word "vandalism" and "incompetent". I stated already above, that the use of those words came thru me feeling offended and at the same time angry/mad towards the other users for not beeing cooperative. As such, I accepted that the use of the words was wrong and next time I will hold my thoughts for myself.
I explained the actual problem on the Talk-Page of User:Ktrimi991. If you have time to read it, I would appriciate a opinion from your side. ( [60])
I wish you a great day and till next time.^^
-- InNeed95 ( talk) 11:05, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Hey El_C, it looks to me like some clerking by an uninvolved admin at AE would be useful right now at the CutePeach thread, but I don't know the norms particularly well. I see that the rules are "500 words and 20 diffs", but given the back-and-forths going on, that seems a little restrictive and asking for permission to extend the comments is excessively bureaucratic at this point. Any suggestions on how to tackle this? GeneralNotability ( talk) 13:20, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
[61] Really? What about unblocking EEng as a way of earning your admin spurs? The most cromulent admins have done that at least three times. [Checks]. OK, I guess that's only one person, then. Bishonen | tålk 07:15, 31 July 2021 (UTC).
I undid the revdel on Dipyridamole...unlike their edits on other pages, this was just insertion of their ref. Still spam obviously, just not copyvio content. DMacks ( talk) 15:19, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
The IP that misspelled your name was previously blocked here [62] and likely the same editor as here [63]. I think it might be HughD but honestly I'm not sure other than it's clear I did something to their Cheerios. Springee ( talk) 01:54, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
What the syntax on one vs two brackets? I've found sometimes I have to use doubles or the link doesn't work. [wp:test] vs wp:test for example. Springee ( talk) 13:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
I really think you're right, that Mjolnirpants/Springee ANI would have been better at AE with its structured discussion. Also I'm sure beating dead asses has to count for exercise, so win-win! —valereee ( talk) 17:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, everyone. Grateful for the friendly banter. Enjoy your Taxpayer-funded Mule. El_C 23:13, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C
Sorry to bother you here, but I think it's probably the best place to ask. This was autoarchived while two elements, a question and evidence of probably not-stale violations were still outstanding. I was hoping to ask how to restore it or otherwise keep it alive until handled? BilledMammal ( talk) 07:08, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Dear @ El C hope you're doing well. Would you mind giving your input as a third opinion in Talk:Kingdom of Commagene#Recent revert? I'm having a minor disagreement over the lede wording with @ HistoryofIran. Arguments are presented in the talk, if you have time, please take a look. Kind regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 08:55, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C. I'm asking since you've always adminned in a balanced way in this topic area while staying uninvolved in the actual disputes. Would you consider putting transgender people in sports ( history) under extended confirmed protection per the gender DS? Or at least semiprotection. This is an extremely contentious and politicized topic in the media right now, and we've just had this editor show up. I had to revert that due to its WP:BLP violations against a scientist working in this area (calling her "bad faith", and citing a blog and engaging in OR to push a narrative about her) as well as numerous violations of WP:MEDRS. This absolutely won't be the last time disruption is a problem at this article. This is no different than climate change or GMOs where scientific articles say one thing while politicized media sources and soundbites can be used to say something else. Crossroads -talk- 14:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The "Grace Under Fire" barnstar |
After following as much as I could stand of this discussion at AN, I am amazed at the good humor with which you keep tolerating the sneers and smears. I am awarding you the "Grace Under Fire" award. Also remembering the not-so-old saying, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall catch hell from both sides". MelanieN ( talk) 17:40, 3 August 2021 (UTC) |
Can you semi Prime Minister of Myanmar? ― Tartan357 Talk 06:31, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey, EL C. Hope you're well. I have filed a semi-protection request at [64]. There are other articles which are targetted by these IPs with the same narrative. [65] [66]. If you have some spare time, could you semi-protect these articles? -- Maleschreiber ( talk) 12:11, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Vanamonde ( Talk) 16:15, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your support and trust in my recent run for admin. I've had an interesting first few weeks and am learning a lot by being able to better watch (through tools) what admins do. Please call on me if you see making an error, or if you just need help. Thanks again. BusterD ( talk) 17:27, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
You can bypass pawaylling in a number of newspaper websites by either 1) clicking the browser's stop button before the page loads with some annoying "subscribe" overlay or 2) even better, read the article in the Internet Archive. Since many newspapers paywall stuff only a few days after the initial writeup, you can get the day 1 version in IA quite often. Neither is foolproof, but they are good to keep in mind. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:49, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
[67] Hahahahha! :) -- Hammersoft ( talk) 20:20, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
BTW, GW, I realize the bot archiving is fast. But if you still wish to respond, this be the space. I naturally assume that this matter is important to you, as well... El_C 17:09, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:G3 domination.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Whpq ( talk) 02:27, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:G3 domination.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 17:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
I hope, you know what I’m talking about. (off Wikipedia pointless comment of mine) Sorry. - GizzyCatBella 🍁 05:21, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Contacting you as you were the admin who semi'd Wi Spa controversy under GENSEX D/s. Just requesting you add to that protection some move protection, as it was just moved w/o discussion in a very NPOV manner and think it would be best that it only be moved by admins. What do you think? ~Gwennie🐈⦅ 💬 📋⦆ 03:13, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey, El C. Hope you're well. A new account
Seemitfe (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
logs ·
filter log ·
block user ·
block log) is moving the titles of articles about medieval Albanian figures to Italian renderings which have typing errors. I can't move them back because of the technical limitation of reverting back a page to its original name The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid.
These pages are:
Gjon Muzaka moved to Giovanni Musachi (the correct Italian rendering is Musacchi),
Lekë Dushmani moved to Lek Dushman (I accidentally moved it to Lekë Dushman I tried to revert it),
Gjergj Arianiti moved to George Aryaniti. They also moved the
Gjergj Kastrioti Skënderbeu National Museum (official name) to
Museum of Skanderbeg. They've tried the same changes before
[68]
[69]. I have none of these articles in my watchlist and I wasn't aware of the changes at the time. Is it possible to restore them to the original titles before the changes?--
Maleschreiber (
talk)
10:59, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. I see you are protecting the site from IP editing by 2023, however there is a problem in both sources do not say that Miroslav Škoro sings anti-Serbian songs. It was invented and added. I hope someone fixes it, and those who invented and added it should be ashamed to lie. Thanks and Bye. 93.136.0.168 ( talk) 16:18, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
The Book of Ruth is surprisingly litle mentioned in song; though I did find this, notable for its use of ska accordion. Narky Blert ( talk) 12:14, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Would you look at my protection edits just now? Did I miss something? BusterD ( talk) 16:57, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hi, thanks for applying page protection to article Pahonia, however I have strong doubts if its level is high enough. All three users (Czalex, Kazimier Lachnovič, Hugo.arg) who aggressively attempted to deny Wikipedia:Consensus were extendedconfirmed users, therefore all of them will still be able to revert and cause edit warring. Probably there will be even more similar users in the future. So could you apply Full protection because it suits its requirements "Articles with persistent disruption from extended confirmed accounts"? This mess took place for way too long and should be solved permanently following WP:CON. -- Pofka ( talk) 17:31, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Oh, I didn't realize this symbol is allowed in wiki text... and it's not even a template. Nice :) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:10, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Sorry to waste your time there. I really did not know the appropriate venue, since it seems like the GS/DS were saying protection can be done by any admin with lots of deference to where they feel it is appropriate, but there doesn't really seem to be a venue to request it other than {{admin help}}
or RFPP. I suppose it could have gone to ArbE? But weird since that isn't usually what that board is used for. And it's even more confusing that the other templates I referenced don't have formal "
consensus required" restrictions on them like they probably should, but instead just editnotices. All in all, very confusing. But I respect your need to have a uniform requirement for RFPP, and I didn't want to waste your time more than necessary to get the answer. So thank you, and carry on with the good mopping, Cow Man. And carry on with the good humor. I will probably just request an informal editnotice that doesn't carry any binding sanctions with it, like
Template:Current consensus editnotice.--
Shibbolethink (
♔
♕)
16:03, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hello, disruptive users began attacking article Coat of arms of Lithuania. Please apply extendedusers protection to it as well. This coordinated attack is related with a recent RF decision at Pahonia. One disruptive user wrote a message to me ( HERE) and began attacking the vital Lithuanian article. Please take actions. Also, please delete all edits made after my yesterday's stable version ( this one). -- Pofka ( talk) 16:42, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
I just notice that Solavirum has recently edited in Abbas Qoli-Khans article in violation of his topic ban from the AA2 area (i think this is the third or fourth time). A historic ruler of an Azerbaijani province obviously falls under the ban area. - Kevo327 ( talk) 07:13, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
It isn't a a "get off my lawn", but a "please behave yourself when you are on my lawn" :P -- In actu (Guerillero) Parlez Moi 18:25, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
There appears to be some who question Haaretz's reliability as a source on Haredi Judaism in general. This user has not said Haaretz in general is unreliable. But reserves the right to do so in the future. 155.246.151.38 ( talk) 22:46, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hello, please apply extendedconfirmed protection to article Coat of arms of Lithuania because Belarusian nationalists keep attacking it. Now another nationalist began deleting content, so he should be blocked as well (e.g. 1, in this he modified Encyclopedia Britannica statements: 2 because he doesn't like them). The trend of this nationalist is the same as the previous ones: Lithuania is Belarus, Lithuanian coat of arms is a Belarusian symbol, etc. These nationalists should be stopped. RFC of Pahonia clearly stated that prior to 1918 there was no Belarusian symbols/state, but these nationalists keep reinserting various controversial statements. -- Pofka ( talk) 13:33, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I'm sorry to interrupt you again, but they simply do not stop. You recently blocked two newly created accounts, however now yet another newly created account was created ( Mkurski) and attempts to recreate Pahonia article (see: Draft:Pahonia coat of arms of Belarus). Can you take urgent actions against this? It is really obvious. These two users you blocked are also related: VikiVeki, Nickitki (false accusations about xenophobia in the edit summaries shows that). I believe user Kazimier Lachnovič is using sock puppetry. Can you check IPs? Though, he is probably hiding with a VPN. -- Pofka ( talk) 11:07, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: The deletion of the Pahonia article has created an anomalous situation: hundreds of years of an important aspect of the Belarusian history has been wiped out there. It was the result of a group of activist editors promoting an actualised and reductionist reading of history. In Wikipedia articles, the the Grand Duchy of Lithuania is now increasingly reduced to a modern ethnicity. The leading contemporary specialists in Belarusian and Slavonic studies - Snyder, Wilson, Plochy, McMillin - would strongly object to such views. This reductionist approach impoverishes both Lithuanians and Belarusians. Please let and encourage the Belarusian perspective to be developed on Wikipedia. Please do not assume that Belarusian editors have malicious intent. We may make mistakes, but we'd like to play fair. Please support it. Nieszczarda2 ( talk) 08:35, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi, sorry to point this out but we are witnessing a wave of Lithuanian nationalistic POV vandalism of Belarus-related articles by an organised group including User:Pofka and User:Cukrakalnis. This included the forced removal, following a fake consensus reached as a result an non-representative vote, of the article Pahonia which a Belarusian historical coat of arms and former state symbol (just as it is a Lithuanian symbol). Moreover, I am the creator of that article but for some mysterious reason I was never notified of any deletion discussion going on - until the article was removed! We see fake accusations of things like sockpuppetry, manipulation like replacing the neutral term “national liberation movement” with emotionally-charged “nationalism” in the article National emblem of Belarus, etc. People are simply being unfair and chauvinistic, doing nothing but asserting themselves at the cost of others, and this is very sad -- Czalex 12:28, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
I'll reiterate my position as stated above. I do not wish to be to go-to admin for Belarussian-Lithuanian disputes. I don't know enough about it and my talk page isn't a noticeboard to raise these concerns (unless especially urgent or egregious). Thanks for understanding, everyone. El_C 13:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
I agree that semi-protecting the article was necessary, but I wouldn't have done it for two months as you just did. A duration of one day or even just a few hours would've been sufficient enough. The vandals will soon see that it's protected and simply move on... That's how it usually works. ;-) ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 02:51, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
That's how it usually worksis kinda rubbing me the wrong way. We've both protected a lot of pages, me +8,200, you +820 (flex!), so I dunno, maybe assume that I already know how it usually works... El_C 03:39, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Greetings User:El C,
I would like to ask you, if you could Review the latest edits by this User.
Especially his continues edits on the Article Template:Foreign relations of Yugoslavia.
I have notified him twice with a warning on his TP about his mistakes, but he is ignoring them by blanking his TP immediatly.
If you have time, a Review would be appriciated.
-- InNeed95 ( talk) 08:28, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Anyone who can admit them is A-ok in my book. —valereee ( talk) 20:12, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Saw your ArbCom reply. I agree. TRM has been absolutely mellow during this Cold Feast. I think he was just a victim of the piece. I'll be happy with the outcome if BHG can grow beyond her present limitations. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:21, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Speaking of songs and non-stressful things, this is a new article that could use some citations that just popped up in my routine patrol of User:AlexNewArtBot/PolandSearchResult. Maybe you'd enjoy copyediting it? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:15, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Good morning El C. I am wondering why you have blocked Variants of SARS-CoV-2 indefinitely. I have clicked on your WP link for an explanation but it refers to editing disputes, which is not the case here. I would be grateful for your explanation. 2A00:23C6:5497:8B01:12E:D663:414B:A1FC ( talk) 08:11, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Dear El_C, I left a message earlier asking you for a third opinion in Talk:Kingdom of Commagene#Recent revert. I also used WP:THIRD, with no replies back. Please consider looking at that talk section and if you'd be kind enough, give your opinion as a third party. I can't resolve that dispute, I'm starting to think that the editor has a certain POV and uses their much higher experience as bullying tactics. They reverted my edit again without even replying in talk diff. I feel like I'm starting to repeat myself, and I can't come to a conclusion with the user. Hoping that you could help to resolve this issue. Thanks in advance. Regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 16:43, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
(idle observation) After my daughter moved away, she called one night urgently needing to know "what is the name of the song with the screamers?" That's what we call it. We prefer this version though. Schazjmd (talk) 20:20, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for sticking up for Flyer here [72] (single brackets). Disagreeing with her is fine. Doing something that would rub noses in her loss is not. Springee ( talk) 04:10, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much for protecting George Harrison's page, I am very happy! 9Revolution.
You asked suggestions for what evidence to look at. I think the arbitration report is starting to focus alot on Mhhossein, but this is understandable because he has made 30% of all edits at Talk:People's Mujahedin of Iran, edited Iranian topics (a difficult area) for 7 years, and dealt with difficult users. I don't think Mhhossein is a perfect editor and I can see his mistakes, though I think his contribution on this topic as been, on the whole, positive.
So my two cents would be to look the evidences on Mhhossein (eg those in Vanamonde's section) and see if any patterns emerge. I tried giving evidence on him but I don't think its adequate. Sorry if my thoughts are all over the place! VR talk 18:45, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Stefka and Mhhossein have filed WP:SPIs against each other— I knew that SB launched an SPI on MH (because I commented on it at the time), but I was not aware that it was also vice versa. That submission to your evidence section says that this is so, but you've provided no, well, evidence. Can you please clarify, then, with evidence? Because WP:SPI/Stefka_Bulgaria does not exist, so I'm confused. To that: not to be a dick, but it's kinda silly of you not to link to these SPIs, but instead just link to the main WP:SPI page, for some reason (like, for what?). El_C 21:31, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
the anti-MEK camp also largely reflects the view of the theo-fascist Islamic regime that rules Iran". Yes, I've been critical of MEK, but does't mean I agree with the Iranian government or its lack of freedoms etc. In fact, you'll find that much of the criticism of MEK actually comes from Western liberal sources. VR talk 22:05, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
I want a clarification on this issue in 2019 Loksabha elections article page ,where results table are for only 542 seats and one seat held later. ECI recently updated the files and includes all seats for calculation vote share ,voters, registered electors and so on. It even published a article and atlas about 2019 loksabha election, I tried to edit as per Election commission of India's sources and files but one user reverted both my edits and references and said that delayed election should not be included.Whether it is a general or delayed election or not, primary source for election related articles in Wikipedia are the election commission of their respective countries. Even Election commission of India saying total electors for GE 2019 are 911,950,784 they reverted to 910,512,091, I even continuously arguing but that user not satisfied for Government's souce and files. Please express your views in it Nahtrav ( talk) 10:40, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
express your views in it, with it being the article talk page. Because other disputants are making use of it. So please do so and stop edit warring. El_C 11:02, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Sorry to prolong this, but do you think you could remind Nahtrav about our canvassing rules? This is not particularly neutral. Given that he's done this on-wiki, I also strongly suspect that another user was canvassed off-wiki to comment given how quickly they appeared on the RfC after Nahtrav and basically just said that they agreed with him... Cheers, Number 5 7 15:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
There are still issue of WP:1RR that was broken about week ago. Do you think it could be brought to WP:AE? -- Shrike ( talk) 15:16, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Or even requested— I know, I write like shit, no need to gloat. El_C 22:42, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
|
Digital Fruit Basket |
For your recent close of an ARBPIA-related ANI thread, the WMF awards you this digital fruit basket. As you know, you have a ways to go before you get one IRL, but we hope these e-grapes tide you over until then. Firefangledfeathers ( talk) 15:18, 18 August 2021 (UTC) |
Thanks for closing the discussion. I won't make any comment about the discussion itself. But if I am parsing your closing note correctly, there was an objection to the template I used? I transcluded it from one of a dozen ANI threads that use it to produce a full list of user-associated links. I wasn't suggesting that editor was a vandal; simply using a format used in any number of similar threads. And not once did I suggest the editor was a vandal. St★lwart 111 02:01, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
I see that User:Space pedant remains unregistered. I am sorely tempted (even if Interstellar Smartarse might be closer the mark). Girth Summit (blether) 15:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=1039461072#Possible_solution? . The case has been closed but I added part (minutes before closure). Adding something have do with this one twitter post and Great Highway Wikipedia. Especially when someone said "they go few rounds" on the page and ""They don't know what they're up against" "... https://twitter.com/graue/status/1427461634482597890 Centralist2021 ( talk) 22:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Centralist2021, I specialize in sanctions, just not in disputes that involve roads. The admin who protected the page also specializes in sanctions. I haven't seen anything to suggest sanctions are needed at this time, but you're free to seek a second opinion. However, I'm wary of burdening any individual admin with that by sending you their way (I feel it'd be an imposition). Good luck. El_C 03:46, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Bbb23 also stated they hated that shit, irdk. Boy do you make our work extremely tedious but I have found away around it though. Celestina007 ( talk) 00:37, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello I got a interesting topic to create an article. Is The Times Bulletin a genuine news source for the reference? Boti2481 ( talk) 00:37, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi I have fixed all issues by talking to an administrator of the Draft:Rishton Ka Manjha I need someone to move the article can you do this? Boti2481 ( talk) 04:35, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Liz. Appreciate it. El_C 08:16, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
User:Mavi Gözlü Kel who has many warnings attack other users here could you look on this, WP:NOTHERE? [73] he was blocked several times. Shadow4dark ( talk) 07:57, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The second thanks in August go to you, for help with Hebrew, and your spirits! My 12th today, DYK? I decorated, also for a birthday. Songs invite to more music, places, food and flowers. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Today: 2 interesting DYK (I think), sadly 2 who died (on top of 2 from Poland yesterday), and a concert in which Daniel Barenboim just played piano, with this wonderful orchestra of players from Israel and Palestine, conductor from Israel, - and afterwards he and the orchestra received last year's prize (pictured). -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:58, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Today: 3 DYK, including that the author dedicated a summer story to a license plate number ;) - Five rows of images added, sunflowers and butterflies continued, four rows of 15 August alone, - a rich Monteverdi day, - enjoy! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:08, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Today: Teresa Żylis-Gara, the second soprano to impress me on stage, died, - long live the memory of her beautiful singing, remembered with thanks. 28 August 2013 was a special concert day: look. After Hillbillyholiday gave me a tree. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:45, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
You are Lobby Lud and I claim my £5! Narky Blert ( talk) 19:59, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
I shot an arrow in the air,
It fell to enough, I knew not where;
But, strangely, at my journey's end,
I found it again in the neck of a friend.
(Falsely attrib. Longfellow.) Narky Blert ( talk) 23:22, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
"I shot an arrow into the air.
It hit the ground, I know not where.
You know. I loose a lot of arrows that way".
GoodDay (
talk)
02:52, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I know you warned Vaze50 on their talk page a few days ago about WP:BATTLEGROUND and WP:ASPERSIONS but Vaze has continued such behavior mostly towards DeCausa on their talk page. It seems Vaze has been give enough WP:ROPE, but has not dropped the WP:STICK and cotinues to beat a WP:DEADHORSE. [74] [75] [76] saying "Your motivation is absolutely bizarre to me", "There are only a couple of plausible reasons. 1) You think the UK is not a country (objectivity false), 2) You have a political objective to advance by removing the UK, 3) Some other reason that isn’t immediately apparent.", and probably more damnin saying "Have you noticed GoodDay that DeCause suddenly went quiet when they accidentally revealed their bias on the topic and their belief that the UK is not a country? How can anybody seriously say that this website is acting in an impartial way when a tiny number of blatantly politically motivated individuals are allowed to bully their way through? What can we do about this?". Please let me know if I am being to cautious. Regards Spy-cicle💥 Talk? 21:10, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El, could you look at Special:Contributions/2601:601:9800:76::/64? The IP resumed their disruptive edits about a day after the block was lifted. User:Alex Bakharev has blocked it twice, but the admin has only edited once in the past month. IIRC, you once asked me about this LTA user, so I figured you might still be familiar with them. Thanks. BilCat ( talk) 06:36, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello, El C. There is an open SPI case of a user Chatterjee95 whom you've blocked from mainspace following an ANI report. Kindly have a look into it. Thanks -- Ab207 ( talk) 12:08, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello El C. I hope you are well. I'm guessing this is what a pirate does when their talk page gets too long :-) Enjoy your weekend. MarnetteD| Talk 17:13, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, I'd like you to know that your initial perception of the sources was not taken as a reflection on me, so I don't regard your apology as necessary at all. Nonetheless, I am happy to accept the apology. Onetwothreeip ( talk) 02:40, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
The kickboxing result for Amansio Paraschiv vs. Lofogo Sarour was overturned. The judges first decided 29-28, 29-29 and 29-29, meaning majority draw. After it was overturned to a UD (unanimous decision) for Paraschiv. And I do have two sources saying this: 1. KickboxingZ 2. Official Facebook of the promotion. The IP is ignoring them. So thanks! What I need is some weeks of protection. .karellian-24 ( talk) 17:12, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El. Forgive me for intruding in this superbly curated section of your talk page, but although I commented earlier this year with a suggestion, I have felt that this section is too personal to you to add stuff to it. It is most enjoyable, and I return here frequently to dip in and haven't found anything not to my taste. Following a lost four hours on one occasion, I have limited myself to two links per day since then. Basically, I wanted to thank you for this and if I may be so bold, to suggest something for you to sample. (For the record, the second sax from the left of your latest link has played as a guest artist with my suggestion), which is, The San Andreu Jazz band. link to leaders Youtube page from a school for performing arts in Barcelona. There is approximatly 15 years worth of video posted by the Professor of the school, Bass and Sax and Conductor Joan Chamorro. I could go on and on and on, but I'll request you to take a look, and find out for yourself, if you have not come across them. Let me know what you think. Best wishes - Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 11:56, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for your block the page Oromia. That good place for dispute resolution, Assuming good faith, I want to request edit in order to add Sheger at the infobox and lead section from [77] [78] [79]. Thanks! The Supermind ( talk) 13:38, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I see you removed an edit summary on the page Lacewood Productions however I think a few more edit summaries will need to be removed for the same reason as the first. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor ( talk) 19:20, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. The disruption at this redirect ( Bigg Boss (Hindi Season 15)) has not stopped even after it being protected. I guess GenuineEditsOnly 2005 should be blocked because they've been warned enough and they continue doing disruption. I'd leave the decision to you because you protected the redirect.....─ The Aafī (talk) 11:12, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Dear @ El C: Thank you for protecting the page of Agra-Lucknow Expressway. Kindly help do the same for Purvanchal Expressway also. I am too working since long to make Wikipedia a nice, informative platform. Regards. Aakash Singh India ( talk) 12:55, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hi, sorry to disturb you again, but they simply don't stop and yet again wants to deny Wikipedia:Consensus. Please take urgent actions against Pahonia (disambiguation). The trend is the same as they claim that one of the historical names of the Lithuanian coat of arms is an exclusively Belarusian symbol (this disambiguation page is nothing else than a shortened version of Pahonia). It was already denied at Wikipedia:Consensus. -- Pofka ( talk) 14:33, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: They implement suggestion B (make disambiguation page) of RFC ( link to RFC once again), despite the fact that the decision was suggestion A (make redirect page). Please delete Pahonia (disambiguation). -- Pofka ( talk) 15:04, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor |
Not the biggest fan of the ol' barnstar, but the El_C brand of crazy keeps AN/I from being a complete cluster. I guess keep it up? ~ TNT (she/they • talk) 14:38, 24 August 2021 (UTC) |
Hello El_C, a relative new account, TSKEnjoyer12 (1 month old creation), have been reverting and errasing information from RS from military equiptement related articles. Multiple times The user reverts content using false arguments in the edit sumary section. Always pushing for a BIASED POV. He have been warned many times, but he errases the warnings, but keep pushing his POV. Mr.User200 ( talk) 18:32, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello El C! I'm a bit confused: reading
WP:ARBHORN, this should have ended around on 9 March, yet I see that you added a new editing restriction on an editor on 4 March (
here) which is
still there now.
EdJohnston also warned the editor for violating the editing restriction on 23 March
[80], which is well after the DS should have ended. Is this a mistake? Because if the editing restriction still stands, the user has been violating it massively. This can be seen at a glance by looking at their recent contribs
[81]
[82]
[83]
[84]
[85] (full disclosure: one of these reverts undid a number of edits by me); they recently even got into a
edit war and 3RR violation on a ARBHORN-related article. Of course, none of this matters if the editing restriction should actually have been retracted. Note recent warnings on their talk page though
[86]
[87]
[88]
[89]
[90]. Should I take this to
WP:AE? Thanks for your attention!
☿
Apaugasma (
talk
☉)
21:29, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
One editor is pushing his old "We don't know who Australia's head of state" BS, again. Another is trying to overturn an RFC result, concerning political offices in infoboxes of bios. A group of editors are trying to control what we can & can't have on our user pages. Is 2021 the year that Wikipedia goes nuts? or is it just me. GoodDay ( talk) 03:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
I notice that you were recently outed by an unimpeachable source as a CIA pig. That being the case, you might enjoy this rabbit hole (do you get that one?) of information and entertainment. JoJo Anthrax ( talk) 17:06, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
AGF clowncar! |
I keep feeling like a huge curmudgeon who always assumes the worst of other editors (especially new accounts editing articles on YouTubers), so the "AGF clowncar" comment made me chuckle. In a sinister creepy-clown way, naturally. Ahahaha. Fact is, this morning I almost posted a diatribe to the Teahouse against a completely innocuous comment that wasn't even directed at me, and that's why I thought I'd check if there was anything in the templated message that just rubbed the editor the wrong way. bonadea contributions talk 19:31, 25 August 2021 (UTC) |
Hi El C, the recent kerfluffle with Special:Contributions/Johnpacklambert illustrates a major hole within Wikipedia's ANI system: The lack of advocates. Often, otherwise competent editors find themselves in situations where they become so overwhelmed that they cannot react objectively. This is especially true for editors on the autism spectrum, but certainly not limited to them. I've been in such situations on Wikipedia myself, and felt extremely overwhelmed. I'm not sure what the solution is, or if there even is one. However, I've never seen this issue addressed, and, given the WMF's sensitivity to people with disorders, this may need to be addressed in some way. BilCat ( talk) 20:19, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello. I have decided to take on this less than trivial unblock request.
I want to start by saying that I believe the block was correct. While indefinite you have given them a path back by pointing out the need for assurances that they recognize the issue and will not repeat it.
Their rather lengthy unblock request seems to admit fault and make such assurances. That being said I believe any unblock should be conditional. I want to discuss with you how you feel about a conditional unblock and what sort of conditions may be appropriate.
I have read through the ANI thread and I see a few suggestions ranging from topic bans, 1RR restrictions, and little tolerance for future similar issues. What do you think would be a good set of conditions to warrant unblocking?
I am also not assuming you take their current statement as sufficient, if there are any deficiencies that need to be addressed please let me know. Ultimately I would like to see a way to let this editor back in a way that will not harm the community. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 01:15, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
Hoping this doesn't cause you too much drama - I do regret being very clear with the whole "if anyone objects I'll revert" thing, but then I didn't really expect anyone to object to a bit of human decency... Ho hum ~ TNT (she/they • talk) 03:40, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Dear El C, firstly, wanted to say thank you for your recent mediation in Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement.
I had a question if you don't mind: Currently, there is a content dispute in Armenian–Tatar massacres of 1905–1907. The user WimpyDood refuses to revert themself and restore stable edit until consensus is reached on talk, see history of edits. I explained them multiple times about wikipedia guidelines and asked to revert to the stable edit per WP:ONUS, WP:CONSENSUS, but, A) they refuse and throw baseless accusations at me, B) they don't reply to my latest messages pinging them and asking the same, see Talk:#Latest addition.
I'm having a lot of difficulties interacting with the user. I'll immensely appreciate if you could intervene. Many thanks in advance. Regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 16:36, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
El C, LouisAragon, thank you for your input and help. I'll restore the stable version of the article until consensus is achieved on talk over the disputed content, as the user WimpyDood still hasn't responded to my pings to self revert themselves and restore the stable edit.
Dear El C, I had one more question just to clarify things and to confirm my understanding of relevant guidelines: If a user added new content to an article, and it got reverted later on, is it correct for subsequent editors to restore said disputed content [1], [2] without achieving consensus on talk?
My understanding is that it's not correct, and I tried my best to explain this (with relevant guidelines including) to WimpyDood [3], who kept reverting and restoring disputed content. I would very much appreciate your thoughts regarding this, so if I'm in the wrong as WimpyDood claims in their next message to me (this isn't the first time from them) [4], I'll know better and act accordingly in the future. Best regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 13:02, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi. After taking some time to cool off, I'd like to withdraw my AE request concerning GoodDay. After a deluge of WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT comments in the original RfC, I felt like the goal was to replicate that at AN, but with a clearer head, I see that there is insufficient evidence to suggest that. ― Tartan357 Talk 20:45, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
All this fighting is giving me serious WP:WIKISTRESS. I'm gonna go work on some unloved articles for a while. ― Tartan357 Talk 20:59, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
An expert on the now-closed Yahoo! Answers once said that someone - possibly Dave Van Ronk - had seen an old photo of a women's prison in New Orleans which had a carving of a rising sun above the grim stone doorway. That makes a lot of sense to me. Link. Narky Blert ( talk) 22:51, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C,
Would you consider EC protecting Causes of transsexuality under the gender DS? This is an extremely politically contentious topic and is a disruption magnet. ( history) Aside from IPs and low-level stuff, an editor who is autoconfirmed but not extended confirmed recently appeared and, even after I reverted them the first time saying in an edit summary to use only WP:MEDRS review articles, they added a bunch of primary sources as well as three major BLP violations, here (the book contains no such relationships whatsoever) and here and here claiming that Ray Blanchard wrote an essay written by someone else.
Thanks for considering. Crossroads -talk- 23:41, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Pinging you next--I've already dropped notes at several noticeboards, and with Ohnoitsjamie. Cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 01:30, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello,
I was trying to update the article 2021 Canadian federal election regarding the NDP's platform policies on various topics, but the article is locked. Can you enable permission to update? - Matticus333 ( talk) 03:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello, El C. Does 2022 New York gubernatorial election, fall under the 1RR rule? GoodDay ( talk) 05:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Just wanted to say your comment “I’m seeing double over here four Cristiano ronaldos” made me laugh. Thanks RossButsy ( talk) 11:10, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey El C, I warmly greet you and hope you're good. I've been noticing repeated vandalism on Sin Boy [94] [95] [96] [97] [98] and I therefore believe semi-protecting the article could be necessary. Thank you in advance.-- Lorik17 ( talk) 11:39, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hi, yet another sock puppet of the same user is performing disruptive editing: Gedzimin. Draft:Pahonia(emblem) is the same as Draft:Pahonia coat of arms of Belarus you recently deleted. This is obviously the same disruptive person. Please take urgent actions against him. -- Pofka ( talk) 19:54, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey El_C, any possibility of a page protection here [99]. I have a feeling it could get really bad. Thanks, Khirurg ( talk) 20:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
By some totally crazy coincidence (MUST be a coincidence), Ktrimi came out of nowhere to rv within a minute of me posting here [100]. This is what we have to deal with in these articles. Khirurg ( talk) 20:31, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for this. Even if I may dislike with the outcome, I believe you have fairly assessed the lack of consensus. However, I do have one favor to ask: Is there any way you could restore the essay's talk page, since the user essay will be kept? I think it adds important context to the community's thoughts on the essay. Let me know if I should file a formal WP:REFUND instead. Thank you.— Shibbolethink ( ♔ ♕) 14:19, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
I just commented at AN/I, but I only now just noticed you blocked 109.79. I think this was a misunderstanding because from what I can tell since 109.79 is actually an experienced user (not a sockpuppet) who had a pretty legitimate reason for doing what they did (certainly weren't ever warned against it at least). I really don't think blocking them was the right call here. – MJL ‐Talk‐ ☖ 17:23, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
The Boomtown Rats were a punk band of the second rank, who'd written a couple of good tunes but had a rep for TTH. Then one day in 1985, with Sir Bob Geldof (as he then wasn't) running on fumes and adrenaline, they did this - and jammed the entire BT phone network for over two hours.
Few popular musicians understand the power of silence. Keith Moon was another.
(I'd bet my life savings Geldof got his K on the recommendation of Brenda or someone in her household - Thatcher couldn't stand him, he called her out.) Narky Blert ( talk) 17:36, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Admin's Barnstar |
For taking on difficult tasks that need to be done I award you the Admin Barnstar. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 23:07, 29 August 2021 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Special Barnstar |
For being “that sort of admin” there are a bunch of you though, but you popped in my head first. I have always been intrigued by men and women of power who aren’t stiff but jovial and act as though they aren’t powerful but command great authority and power it’s hard to explain but I hope you get what I’m trying to say. Furthermore for being an admin who is unafraid or unfazed in the face of tough decisions. Celestina007 ( talk) 23:51, 29 August 2021 (UTC) |
Kolkata Downgrade the protection to semi because of page stablity.. Thanks.– ItsSkV08 ( talk) 08:40, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Is this you?-- Ymblanter ( talk) 15:53, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. Some IP hopper (from Turkish Cyprus) has appeared out of nowhere and is disrupting the latest articles I have edited. [103] [104] -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 19:57, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
I saw that you were the administrator that protected User:Johnpacklambert's talk page; would you be willing to look at the user page as well? Brownugget ( talk · contribs) is an account created today that seems to be created with the sole purpose of messing with JPL and made this edit to his user page. - Aoidh ( talk) 22:54, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
I was not aware of the edit notice, in hindsight that makes a lot of sense. First time doing a page restriction under DS. Thank you. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 23:01, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
The user Aydin mirza keeps casting aspersions in Talk:Kapan#Edition and sources. Their latest reply is a good example [108]. They seem to be a WP:SPA account [109], and have a history of disruptive and POV style edits in AA area. They also re-revert every time their disruptive edits are reverted [110], [111], despite all the notices in their talk page. Maybe you could take a look, dear El C. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 13:37, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
BilCat ( talk) 00:25, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Friend in hospital needs help. Possibly serious, but not life threatening. Might be resolved quickly enough, but if I vanish for a few days, that'd be the reason.
Sorry in advance if I miss your comment here, there's been like 50 edits to my talk page in the last 2 days alone, which is really par for the course. Please note that, in general, there's no harm in placing a note at the bottom here just to check if maybe I overlooked your comment. That said, there are a few (very few) threads/comments I purposefully do not reply to for whatever reason, so, I dunno, use your discretion there I suppose (ask yourself: what would Darth Tyrannus do?).
Thanks everyone and best wishes, El_C 17:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
You changed edit prot here but that also set the temporary move prot to indef. Can you remove the move prot or lower it to autoconfirmed to match edit? ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 00:18, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Dear El_C, hope you're doing well. As the title says, user Verman1 edit wars and later adds complete WP:OR with POV modifications in Nagorno-Karabakh conflict: Revision history. As seen from the history, I notified them numerous times about their unsourced additions, now they're adding the same with a source that doesn't support their claims (and which after checking, I told them [112]). They re-reverted me yet again without an explanation (also breaking 1RR if it applies) [113]. Clear breach of WP:OR, WP:EW and WP:DE. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 13:20, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
98.113.137.35 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Hi El C
An IP has recently emerged, adding personal commentary and removing sourced information [114] [115] [116]
A interesting thing is that the edit he did here [117], which is basically a restoration of a previous banned users edit [118], both of whom have the same rather rude behaviour [119] [120] [121]. This guy deffo seems to know me (or well, he think he does). -- HistoryofIran ( talk) 19:16, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) @ HistoryofIran: maybe I can help. An IP range is like a net you throw over a bunch of IPs that are given out to users connecting to the same network, which is often determined by being geographically close to each other. The larger the net you throw, the more chance there is that you will 'catch' more than one user receiving IPs within that range.
So if we block an IP range, we want to make sure that the net is not too big: we want to block the disruptive user, but we might not want to block their brilliant neighbour who happens to sit in the same IP range. The way to do this is to look for the IP range that does include all the disruptive IPs, but not any (or too many) others.
For example, the smallest IP range in this case is 98.113.137.35/32 (you can reach this by going to an IP's contribs and manually adding "/32" to the URL), which doesn't include 98.113.137.113. The largest possible IP range, 98.113.137.35/16 (the smaller the number after the /, the larger the range), does include it, but is of course much too large. The fastest way to find the smallest range that includes it is to first check the one in the middle between 16 and 32, 98.113.137.35/24, which still includes it, then again the middle between 24 and 32, 98.113.137.35/28, which doesn't include it anymore because it is too small, and so work your way to 98.113.137.35/25, which is the smallest IP range that contains both disruptive IPs.
The next thing to do is to check whether any of the other IP's caught up in the range can be safely assumed to belong to the same disruptive user. If not, blocking that range will also block the non-disruptive and potentially brilliant users behind the other IPs. Whether that 'collateral damage' is worth it, is something El C doubtlessly will be able to judge. ☿ Apaugasma ( talk ☉) 00:08, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, extra eyes on this will be appreciated--I don't want to spend the late night reverting and repeating, then going to a noticeboard. Thanks and cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 02:56, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
To start off, if this is too recent for you to wish to discuss, I can understand that and will happily go crawl back under my rock.
But in light of recent events, it's interesting to me to consider my recent proposal in light of recent events. Now it's a different situation to be sure, but I wonder, setting aside the 24 hour arbitrary time limit a second, I wonder if discussions (between blocker/unblocker/potential blocker/various editors/community/etc.) might have been more fruitful somehow. This was a mess, but such situations often are.
I'm wondering what we (as editors, as admins, as part of a community) could do better here.
And in thinking about it, I guess I was wondering what your thoughts were, not so much necessarily on this specific situation, but situations in general. - jc37 06:18, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
I really do not care much about what that particular editor does, but out of curiosity. Is an editor who is topic banned from the Balkans allowed to edit articles that mention Romania, Serbia and Croatia [127]? Ktrimi991 ( talk) 17:51, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello, El_C, User:Karak1lc1k left me a message at my talk page, dont know what to say, could something be made. For example to protect my talk page or indicating him that talk pages are not Forums. I'm not Iraqi or Belgian but dont believe that type of opinions should be allowed, because of WP:FORUM and WP:CIV. By the way that user was blocked in the past for disruptive edits and turning talk pages in forums 1, 2, 3. Mr.User200 ( talk) 18:01, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Hey El_C, hope you are doing well (and your friend who was in a hospital too). Just to let you know, this RfC i opened more than a month ago has not gained any contribution, however, so far two other editors have already said that the current version is not legit, Visioncurve and Kansas Bear. Thoughts ?---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 20:19, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
cheers El C, wondered if you can help here- an editor has added this (Procurement) table which mostly speculative content, and a mess to read - further the content is already covered Royal Malaysian Air Force page. I've removed & noted here to no avail (twice wanna avoid an edit war)- any help would be appreciated - Thanks FOX 52 talk! 05:14, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
that's not the proper use of a table WP:WHENTABLE -further already covered in the "Present development": (RMAF page)( diff) — that's actually not the best approach for dealing with someone who has only been here for a couple of months. It would have been better to explain in simple terms on the article talk page what all that means, then add a link to it at the end of the original edit summary. Otherwise, it sort of comes across as wiki alphabet soup bombardment of a new'ish editor. And, in general, communicating through edit summaries is rarely enough for content disputes. HTH! El_C 10:09, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
Can you please renew the protection on 2021 Burmese protests? ― Tartan357 Talk 08:34, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
On a related note: I'm in agreement with @ Tartan357: that the current prime minister of Myanmar, is the 12th prime minister. I'm quite familiar with the editor (Mewulwe), who has a habit of 'deleting' numberings from random office holder infoboxes, with a tendency to edit-war over it. Kelvin Goertzen, is the latest example. GoodDay ( talk) 17:28, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
You might take a look at Topal Osman, there has been an edit war on-going since 10:39, 17 July 2021, when user:Alexander Leone started removing referenced. [130] -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 20:28, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
I definitely used to ECP templates before it was "approved", since the option was there in the software and it made sense to me, but then someone (don't remember who) decided to make a big deal about all the templates that were ECP protected out of process and insisted that I reverse a bunch of them. Then a couple years go by and we turn around and approve it "formally" or whatever, and now folks want to take admins to task for using template protection "when ECP would suffice", even for things that happened years ago. I do love a bureaucracy. Ivanvector ( Talk/ Edits) 01:41, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello El C, this article claims that Iran and Sudan and Ba'athist Iraq are allied with Egyptian Islamic Jihad and I noticed that so many people are angry about it and keep removing it from the lead. I added it again after somebody removed it, but I'm not sure if I shall keep it or remove it. So I decided to ask an administrator to tell me what to do. رايكر ( talk) 08:44, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C, the user whome you have blocked User:Sushameendra Simha.Vaddigiri has created another account User:Sushameendra Simha.V and started doing the same thing again. - MRRaja001 ( talk) 11:34, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
The user seems to be a sockpuppet/meatpuppet [131] judging by their knowledge (for a 100 edit account) and mostly POV focused edits in AA area and in Turkish articles. They have been reported in an SPI previously [132]. They seem to be quite knowledgeable about guidelines, examples: Neutrality, consensus. [133] (note below 20 edits at that time), and others [134], [135]. What do you think, El C? I have very limited experience with sockpuppets/meatpuppets, so wanted to ask for advice. Many thanks in advance. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 01:02, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Hey El! I came across this draft tagged with WP:G4 which I declined because the discussion it linked was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason J. Hogg (2nd nomination) which was a speedy by you. But then there is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason J. Hogg which had Keeps. So, the speedy would seem to be an error if the first AFD was also about the same topic. In that case, the proper course would seem to be to restore the article as it was "no consensused" in the first discussion and start another AFD? Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:25, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Jason Jude Hogg is the Executive Vice President of Preferred Dynamix, a business that is part of Rent-A-Center.
I am here regarding the topic of deletion of "Zakarid Armenia" due to many reverts, I've lost the huge wall of texts and arguments that I had which you accidentally reverted. So, if I may ask, could you please do it yourself or, at least copy the text I've written and paste it here so I re-do it? SonofJacob ( talk) 15:53, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently-filed request for clarification or amendment from the Arbitration Committee. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment#Nicoljaus, indef topic ban and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the Wikipedia:Arbitration guide may be of use.
Thanks,-- Nicoljaus ( talk) 10:54, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
In the open Iranian politics arbitration case, the proposed decision has now been posted. Please review this decision and draw the arbitrators' attention to any relevant material or statements. Comments may be brought to the attention of the committee on the proposed decision talk page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. You were notified as you made comments in the case request. For the Arbitration Committee, Moneytrees🏝️ Talk/ CCI guide 01:49, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Arbcom can never take our love! [161] Izno ( talk) 03:05, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Maybe I shouldn't try to read WP:ANI from a phone, but I was scanning through it and saw Concerns About Softlavender by Butterslipper, and saw your close stating that a CBAN had been imposed, and I thought that it couldn't possibly mean what it appeared to mean. I knew that it had to mean that the Original Poster had been banned. But the subsequent subthread to that effect wasn't in view. I figured that it really meant that Butterslipper had thrown the boomerang at a kangaroo that wasn't there. So, in this case, the close wasn't self-explanatory unless one scanned way down. Just adding that it was the OP would have helped. Oh well. Robert McClenon ( talk) 19:26, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Unrelated-related tidings of-the-now: just got a scam phone call from India (and you know I answer all of em!) about how I'm gonna get super-awwested. The "officer" asked for my name, so naturally I said it was "Ham Alvis." Him: okay, Mr. Ham. Me: No, Ham is my first name, my last name is Alvis. Him: okay, Mr. Alvis, let me transfer you to one of our agents. But sadly, I didn't reach the 2nd tier. They might have just google'd the name. So, no joy. Or, partial joy only. El_C 17:18, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello, since the Kurdish-related content on the Germiyanids page has been subject to persistent disruption for a period of two weeks by Turkish nationalist editors wanting to remove or minimize anything Kurdish-related from the article, and some suspected sockpuppets (still waiting investigation) who persistently keep removing a specific and sourced piece of the content about the religious Yezidi background of the dynasty's Kurdish component, I've come to request an extended confirmed protection for the page. KurdeEzidi ( talk) 14:59, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your help, have a good day. KurdeEzidi ( talk) 16:22, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
I came across some allegations on the Rex Wilson article, and removed them as they were unsourced and of a serious nature. This isn't a BLP issue, as he's been dead for nearly 100 years.
Looking into the details the allegations were added
back in 2017, but went unnoticed until a different IP editor removed them in
February of this year. That was reversed [
in April, which I reverted
in August. Once again come September the details were
added back, and again
I reverted.
I feel it likely the person adding and re-adding the details is the same person, they don't appear inclined to discuss the matter, and each time it's added by a different IP months apart.
So here's where I need advise. I can't report the IP as they an never the same, but asking for page protection seems pointless given the delays between each edit. However I'm basically in a extremely slow edit war, and every option seems unhelpful. Given the nature of the allegation it doesn't seem ideal to just let the matter go. If this was a BLP issue I would have asked for the revision to be revdel'd.
I've tried finding any evidence of the allegation or details of George Edward Wilson's (he's real name) later life, but without any success. Apart from the BFI link the only offer source I've found online is a death notice in a local newspaper archive that is likely related, but gives no more details. Rex certainly appears notable have directed multiple films, but due to the amount of time that has past it's very difficult to find anything.
Any advise on how I should proceed?
92.5.2.97 (
talk)
22:10, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
I know it's the wrong reference, but I always see Heston pretending to be dead on horseback when I see you name.
Hello there comrade. I cannot help but notice this remark you made in an edit summary for
Gina Carano: this thing again? Which is to say: fire-and-forget graffiti by supporters and detractors alike continues unabated
. This is an inaccurate assessment, and borders on bothsidesism. There is no ongoing back and forth between two sides, one being Gina Carano's supporters, and the other being her detractors. There are only supporters, who are members of a known far-right hate group that calls itself "The Fandom Menace", trying to vandalize the article and remove important information related to the social media controversy that led to her ousting from lucasfilm, in an attempt to whitewash her. There is no "other side" of "detractors", just regular contributors trying to fix the damage. Just thought you might want to know.
46.97.170.112 (
talk)
09:45, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
InNeed95 doesnt learn nothing, he still vandalizing, edit warring and POV pushing, per this Special:Contributions/InNeed95 your comment was indeed useless to InNeed95, he persists violating wiki rules and stalking other users... Aquinasthomes1 ( talk) 11:09, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Just wanted to shoot you a quick thanks. I see you doing admin work all over the place, and generally trying to keep spirits high and cut down on unnecessary drama when you can. Obviously, not everyone appreciates your sense of humor, but at least you're trying to add some levity. Anyway, know that people you don't really interact with see and appreciate what you do. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 20:29, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St3kjsmOQQE Narky Blert ( talk) 22:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, sorry to bother you. Can you have a look at this report regarding disruptive IPs. Thanks a lot. — Paper9oll ( 🔔 • 📝) 12:56, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Greetings,
Since August ending are in communication ( your comment @ my talk page) about #En masse public molestation and sexual violence against women.
In spite of reasonable effort from my side that includes communicating with content deleting IP's talk pages as well as related project talk pages, and couple of user talk pages from article history there is no response from content deletionist side.
One response which I received on my talk page supports encyclopedic notability of the incidence, but had some other query which has been answered by me.
Since it is almost 3 weeks there is no communication from deletion side I suppose Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle supported by semi protection might lead to the discussion, please do suggest.
Thanks and warm regards
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 12:40, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for protecting the page. There’s been a slow edit war on that for about a year. Something more than a 4 day lock is probably needed…but I don’t know what. DeCausa ( talk) 13:24, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
I’m not sure why the two camps get so upset about it. It may be connected with some sort of local modern POV that I’ve never been able to fathom or it may be just the normal WP pedantry-syndrome— it can be two things! Regards, El_C 14:22, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Well, this would probably require going a fair bit back in time. See [179] for a compilation of diffs from September last year. I have my doubts that this has been a perpetual edit-war, based on the following evidence:
Homeopathic A&E. Narky Blert ( talk) 20:52, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. Firstly, hope you aren't too bothered by this from yesterday. I was so confused when I read that, only thing that came to my mind was this (especially when I later took a look at their page and previous conversation with you).
Anyhow, my good friend SonofJacob was back. They started to edit-war (again) in Zakarid Armenia with an uninvolved user over their AfD result, who (rightfully) closed the AfD as speedy keep. Here are the diffs, it's quite funny actually (maybe sad who knows): [192], [193], [194].
Here comes the best part tho: When they finally reached the 3rd revert, they created another account to cirumvent yet another 3RR breach, see user Mukvani16 ( talk · contribs) and their glorious two edits: [195], [196].
It was such an obvious WP:DUCK that the AfD closer themself opened an SPI investigation/SonofJacob. Finally, my question is, why was the SPI closed exactly? It had so many red flags and was a very obvious WP:DUCK case, and as you can see from the AfD, it isn't only my opinion. I asked Callanecc to kindly explain and maybe consider reopening, and showed them the previous issues with SonofJacob. I haven't got a reply to my latest message (understandably, it's weekends), so I hoped you could shed some light. Thanks in advance and best regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 23:15, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. I noticed that you reverted Sjalel per WP:ARBPIA4 on Jul 13, 2020 regarding the Mandaeans article. The user appears to be making the same type of edits now for Mandaeism and also citing articles, but changing their meaning as they did in Mandaeism on Sep 16, 2021. I tried to change one such edit. Are these types of edits allowed? Thanks Mcvti ( talk) 23:37, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
As info I've applied a couple of wide range blocks that may help with this LTA. Edit: At least for a bit. I looked further back on Corrin now and see how bad this one has been. -- ferret ( talk) 13:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Can you protect the National Democratic Party of Germany page? Repeated disruption (maybe even considered vandalism) by an IP user [199]. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 15:53, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Probably happened at the same time you protected it, so he just sneaked through. I'm sure it ends now, thanks. Ifnord ( talk) 21:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for intervening on Godzilla vs Kong. However, the person that was edit warring left this ( 1) and this ( 2) on my talk page. He could get temporarily banned for these, right? Armegon ( talk) 21:52, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thanks for dealing with the Dhar Mann salt issue. Have a great day! snood1205( Say Hi! (talk)) 23:15, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
If user:Idris Munaf Shaikh2 agrees, would you consider moving the List of Indian battles to their sandbox for them? It is in dire need of references, proper linking(to battles instead of people, places, or things), and overall verification.
Once it is moved can the current version be deleted or will that require a more complicated resolution? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 15:49, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
My sincerest thanks to both of you! -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 17:01, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
The amendment request Amendment request: Nicoljaus, indef topic ban, has been declined by the Committee. You can review the closed amendement request here. For the Arbitration Committee, firefly ( t · c ) 12:00, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Really don't think that article should be E/C'd, yes he was a major figure in the A/I conflict, but he was so much more than that and the article covers wayyyyyy more than Israel related things. Think that should fall under the partially related part of things. nableezy - 15:24, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Lift Him Up. Bonus marks if you know what instrument he played without looking it up. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:52, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
I was reminded by someone with a better memory than my own that my white pet rabbit's name was actually Mister Whitey, because... respectable. El_C 16:38, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for protecting Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, (I requested it after noticing significant amounts of disruptive edits relating to massive fan cruft, and not the kind TV Tropes would like) but it seems that didn't do jack. Our disruptive editor seems to go right through the autoconfirmed wall. I just noticed that someone credited DHX Media (turns out they didn't get the memo it's actually called WildBrain now) for the series. Also, producers Sarah Wall and Kirsten Newlands have been added onto Dee Bradley Baker (Boo Boo Chicken and Coco the Monkey) and Nika Futterman's (the singing lock from season 4, episode 20, "Mickey's Monster Musical") credits respectively. I really don't wanna start an edit war. That would ruin my good standing.
Namethatisnotinuse Namethatisnotinuse ( talk) 22:20, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
You're not dumb, you're a genius. Thank you for your edits. Also, Hey. Lostfan333 ( talk) 22:45, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Nice Lostfan333 ( talk) 00:21, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I saw you fully protected this page a week ago because of disruption caused by changing birth place. But unfortunately the unconfirmed or IP accounts continue to vandalize the article by adding wrong information. Can you please see this problem. Thankyou. 🌌Zoglophie🌌 14:20, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Omas gegen Rechts - enjoy strong women! I thought of Yoninah on the first day of Rosh Hashanah. I hope you could help your friend. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:41, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
?? - today: the day of bold red and black, for Dante who died 700 years ago, and Peter Fleischmann who died recently, leaving us films full of vision. Dante: just heard Inferno, imagined by a woman, the main character both speaking and singing with an inner 4-part voice! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:32, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Today: a woman in red (back to the beginning of the thread), two who died under "in memoriam" and LouisAlain missed - my first editnotice read: "Every editor is a human being" which is quoted from a comment by Geometry guy in a 2012 discussion on WP:AN. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:30, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
lies about machine translations. Huh, that's a new one for me. Weird. El_C 17:57, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Pearly Brown, possibly the last of the blind singing preachers. Docu.
Britiana isn't a thing, but I'm minded to give you a couple of examples. Narky Blert ( talk) 18:32, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
You issued this IP their second block not that long ago. [200] They are still at it, it seems. [201]- [202] - LouisAragon ( talk) 12:16, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Ever look around Wikipedia, see the depth of so much nonsense and wonder if your are wasting your time trying to push back on the sea? - jc37 17:01, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
You blocked User:Pritam kumar roni das for lack of communication and copyright infringement is back and engaged in sockpuppetry. The new accounts are
Thanks. 42.105.4.65 ( talk) 17:33, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi El, can you please move North American A-36 Apache to North American A-36? The move discussion has been closed as "Move", but the article is still move-protected. Thanks. BilCat ( talk) 20:12, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Bored nationalist or monarchist has pov’d this. Given Margaret was a seven year old, can you semi or indef? Thanks awfully. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.150.39.166 ( talk • contribs)
I think that 10 days was probably a bit excessive; 1-3 days probably would have been enough since the page now isn't as heavily edited. Also, didn't see your comment until now! Jeuno ( talk) 23:02, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
You are banned indefinitely from editing or discussing anything to do with the WP:AA2 topic area, including anything to do with the Armenian genocide, broadly construed
Turkish War of Independence is related to the Armenian Genocide. Although DriedGrape's sanction was broadly construed, they engaged in a discussion in this topic area. I think this is a violation of their topic ban. Best regards.-- V. E. ( talk) 16:38, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
The Arbitration Committee has authorized uninvolved administrators to impose discretionary sanctions on users who edit pages related to Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts, including this article.(taken from the talk page of the article)-- V. E. ( talk) 16:49, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
I just checked the source and doesn't having a big chunk of the first section after the lead, that being Historiography here, constist of a single source, that one being a recent interview with a single historian on an obscure news site, make it undue and even fringe? Especially when in the exact same source, the interviewee admits their field of expertise is not the ethnic cleansings that took place during the era? Even the interviewer doesn't seem reliable as the entire interview has loaded questions, claiming TWoİ had an İslamist purpose.Doesn't ethnic cleansing during and historiography of the Turkish War of Independence fall under their topic ban?-- V. E. ( talk) 16:59, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
(
talk page watcher) the article falls directly under
WikiProject Armenia, and has extensive mention of the Armenian genocide as well. From the lead:
Simultaneously, the Turkish nationalist movement carried out massacres and deportations in order to eliminate native Christian populations—a continuation of the Armenian genocide and other ethnic cleansing operations during World War I.
Both fall under their
broadly tban.
ZaniGiovanni (
talk)
17:19, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
My talk page contributions were not even remotely related to the topics I have been sanctioned from. DriedGrape ( talk) 17:27, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Until it is demonstrated that the comments in question touch on AA2 in a direct way, this may just be skirting the limits of the ban, which while isn't recommended, isn't expressly prohibited, either. El_C 17:33, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Cleoma Breaux Falcon - " Hand Me Down My Walking Cane". Narky Blert ( talk) 18:54, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Hey, El C. Hope you're well. I have filed a new SPI about an account. Can you please take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Haldir Marchwarden?-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 22:41, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
if so, then could you link it and I'll fill in the details and throw one your way for the magnificent pun in
Anyway, anyone, like yours truly, not intimately familiar with the UK Labour party's anti-semitic -related (expressly so) expulsions and background, is going to be left (-) scratching their heads here, I suspect. Nishidani ( talk) 09:14, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I just thought I'd mention that your intended indefinite block is pretty definite. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 10:40, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Please consider making editing to Jennifer Homendy available to verified accounts as the vandalism and accusations are coming from non-account editors who appear to be incited by Elon Musk. Thank you. QRep2020 ( talk) 14:13, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Can you please renew the protection on Vice-President of Myanmar? ― Tartan357 Talk 00:24, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
LingThukhaShwe ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has logged in to repeat their disruptive edits: [208], [209], [210], [211], [212]. Note in the first diff that they cited the same bogus BBC source as the IP did. The source does not at all support their claim that the deposed VP is still in power, only that he is under house arrest rather than being in prison. ― Tartan357 Talk 04:03, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Unpleasant distraction. El_C 12:28, 30 September 2021 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
Hey El C, hope you're doing well. Could you please take a look at this] discussion? This is the first time in my Wikipedia editing that I felt like I'm being bullied by more experienced editors. And I noticed you're familiar with one of the editors, so if it isn't hard for you, please have a look at that discussion. With best, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 00:46, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
...When I interact with you, I get the feeling that this is someone who has edited Wikipedia before[213]
Oh really, you get that feeling. Are you suggesting I'm a sockpuppet or something? Well, here's my suggestion: Since you have no problem in expressing your baseless feelings about me, I'll voluntarily choose to undergo an SPI investigation (since no Clerk would even endorse it if you felt to try). Pick any editor(s) you want, I really don't give a damn. One caveat, tho: when the SPI fails (and it will), you have to apologize to me publicly on my talk page for your baseless feeling and assumption.[214]
HA! You are the one that wanted to make this personal, not me. And SPIs can not connect to anyone beyond 3 months. Nice try though. Time will tell.[215]
even tho when interacting with you I don't get a warm feeling— seriously, how do expect barbs like that to go? The way it looks to me, you're the one starting with the less-than professional conduct:
Whoa there big fellaand
lolis too chat room -like and is especially inappropriate in the midst of a heated dispute. So, I'm sorry, but it feels cherry picked and it ignores the impetus for the personalizing (you). Not saying the response is necessarily the best, either, but I'd wish you'd be more self-critical here. BTW, being friendly with someone, or friendship outright even, isn't something that would sway me. I've chided Gerda plenty. Gently, but still. El_C 01:50, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Whoa there big fella and lol is too chat room: I replied to someone who wrongly said that I "don't have consensus to change the stable version", when in fact, I restored the stable version (see this which enjoyed consensus for 3yrs, and the one just before KansasBear's edits. And now compare it to the current article). Moreover, they were already pre-planning a "meeting in the noticeboard" lol [216] without even hearing my reply or even knowing the actual context. He just gave me the big fella energy ( you're not that guy pal). Don't you think that's the least harmless reply I could've gone with, considering their wonderful comment?
even tho when interacting with you I don't get a warm feeling, I inherently respect any experienced editors like yourself just for the amount of work put on this website[217] This is the full sentence. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 02:13, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
even tho when interacting with you I don't get a warm feeling, I inherently respect any experienced editors like yourself just for the amount of work put on this website, they received feelings and assumptions of sockpuppetry with no proof, this could've ended somewhere in WP:AE or WP:ANI. Especially since I'm more than willing to voluntarily undergo an investigation (if there is any way, I really don't care), and I receive a reply of "Time will Tell".
Also, your sources did not state Armenian origin, taken in context their usage simply means the same as "dynasty that ruled over Armenia". Please look at the edit history of the article. I even tried to restore this which wasn't even discussed and was removed becasue of "WP:V". I added the exact page and the quote with it, yet it still got reverted.
Ah, how sweet still pulling all those rules. Odd how someone that has only edited for 6 months knows SO much about Wikipedia.[221]. Btw, that was in response to my comment in the talk. Also how come like-minded editors discuss on talk and achieve conesnsues, unanimously agreeing with each other, while I'm the only one with a different perspective? That's why I'm asking your input. Can you please objectively look at my edits and comment, and give us your thoughts? If the "origin" part was the issue in my edits, then surely Armenian dynasty should be added back in the lead because all of my added WP:RS sources mention it as Armenian dynasty. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 00:26, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Debresser's version already enjoyed consensus, at the very least loosely, via WP:SILENCE. You can't tell him that his version has no consensus when yours has even less! El_C 05:41, 31 July 2021 (UTC).
ZaniGiovanni, I don't understand what you're asking of me. I don't understand why you keep pinging me to that page. SILENCE is not an entitlement. Three editors disagree with you, all of whom veterans of the topic area, if you contend their views aren't representative of the interested editorial pool, you're free to run an WP:RFC that would determine whether this is or isn't so. There's noticeboards for conduct matters with which you are already familiar. I don't really know what else to say. El_C 01:39, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Why have they not made a re-make of this movie!?!? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 01:44, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Akhtar Raza Khan ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Due to this edit (by an editor who hasn't edited in a month, rather conveniently) straight after the protection and image being restored, would it be possible for the protection to be increased to ECP please? FDW777 ( talk) 13:53, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi, El_C, and I hope you're doing well. Could you please unprotect or decrease the level of protection on 2021 Atlantic hurricane season to PC? The edit-warring between autoconfirmed editors has stopped. Thanks, Destroyer ( Alternate account) 20:35, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
The edit-warring between autoconfirmed editors has stopped. But the WP:ECP technically restricted them from making any edits to the page (edit warring and otherwise). So I was, like, stopped? How could it re/start? Cheers, El_C 12:42, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
The King of Rome - Dave Sudbury 1, HMHB 2, June Tabor 3 The Unthanks 4.
Narky Blert ( talk) 21:45, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
See Special:Contributions/CreatorofGod19. :) BilCat ( talk) 22:25, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello Sir El C, greetings from this side. The Draft Dremo is ready, please take a look at it. Thank you. -- Idoghor Melody ( talk) 23:16, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Greetings @ El C: I was curious about, if I report somebody thru the Noticeboard for Example... is this connected with Wiki-Commons or does it have to be another way? Because the Sock of JohnGotten ( User:Aquinasthomes1), is now doing his stuff on Wikicommons 1. -- InNeed95 ( talk) 14:48, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Meddlin' with the Blues. By no means the greatest blues number ever recorded (though that's some decentish harp playing). The point of interest is that Leonard and Mays performed in 1925 as The Two of Spades - which antedates the first written mention of the ethnic slur "spade" by 3 years. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:32, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hi , I 've Requested For Rollbackers Right on WP:PERM But Any Admin not Attention on My Request. Best Regards Maniik 🇮🇳Any Help🇮🇳? Contact Me. 14:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello EL C,
I am having some Serious issues with these ip's /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4021:7500:B1C1:3B4:BE3D:7CD2 and /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4021:7500:BCFD:E67:2830:3056. The person that created Tevin21 account was blocked indefinitely, the same person that created that account also used this ip /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/2600:8800:4021:E900:58BF:FE40:E178:BED9 to add incorrect information to WWE Hell in a Cell please see these two edits by this ip- https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=WWE_Hell_in_a_Cell&oldid=1047818909 and https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=WWE_Hell_in_a_Cell&oldid=1047819090, This ip said that in his edit that The 2021 event was the final Hell in a Cell PPV held, as the event was discontinued and replaced by Bash at the Beach in 2022, to me that is a lie and WWE will never hold a bash at the beach ever again. Ever since protection ended for WWE Hell in a Cell these two ip's (2600:8800:4021:7500:B1C1:3B4:BE3D:7CD2 and 2600:8800:4021:7500:BCFD:E67:2830:3056) has resumed adding false information to WWE Hell in a Cell Chip3004 ( talk) 21:34, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
If you've got some time to waste, search YouTube for "animals house of the rising sun reaction". It's like another British Invasion - but this time with Black guys being reintroduced to their heritage, rather than White guys being shown what they'd ignored.
My OR is that in the late 40s to early 60s there was a handful of British merchant seamen who'd buy singles in the States, play them to death on the voyage home, and sell them when they got back. The Smokey Robinson/Motown fan was from Liverpool (hence The Beatles), the Chicago blues fan from London (hence The Stones), and the JLH fan from Newcastle (hence The Animals).
Lonnie Donegan was a minor musician - but his covers of Lead Belly and Woody Guthrie got into the UK charts in the 1950s, when the best that musicians like that could hope for back home was to get arrested. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:43, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
I thought the AE report on me over a month ago, was strange. But the current AN report, outdoes it. GoodDay ( talk) 16:26, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
You recently SPed that page to prevent disruption due to obvious socking. Needless to say; the socking has continued. RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 00:32, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, could you look at Special:Contributions/2A02:2F0E:6011:D00:78B8:36BF:F207:9CB9. Their continued edits on Bell 429 GlobalRanger are breaking the infobox along with edit warring, and the edit here looks like vandalism. Thanks. BilCat ( talk) 01:35, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Topal Osman. No sooner than the page protection expired, an IP removed referenced information. *sigh* In happier news, Chicago somehow beat Detroit. AND, my grandson Luke was born this morning! WOO HOO! -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 01:58, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. Wanted to ask if repeatedly pinging an editor who shares same POV constitutes as canvassing? Aydin mirza ( talk · contribs) has pinged Grandmaster multiple times, asking for opinions with a non-neutral tone [223], [224]. Despite me reverting their , they didn't ping me or any Armenian editors in talk. I tried to explain this to them, and notified them of canvassing, but they still pinged their favorite editor with non-neutral tone. Also, how can one apply for “third party” when multiple editors are already involved? ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 19:19, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Bukka White - "Aberdeen, Mississippi Blues" and " Poor Boy" - link.
Bonus live tracks - Hound Dog Taylor ( link) and Django Reinhardt ( link). Look at their left hands. Narky Blert ( talk) 20:46, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey, El C. Hope you're well. In a discussion about a block, several policy issues have emerged User talk:BleronZ#Block Appeal Discussion. I feel that a review by an admin who knows the Balkan topic area and is experienced in policy matters will be able to clarify them.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 21:42, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
User:Gerry Scott is almost delicately a cross wiki sock, and gamed extended confirmed in part by adding machine translations of movie plots. Should that be reverted, and it's there a way to roll them back en mass? Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 20:41, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello, El_C, a evasive user account keep posting the same type of comments at my talk page. Same type of comment a Anon IP posted months ago. Seems the same person. Mr.User200 ( talk) 22:37, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello El C,
Sorry to bother you. I removed a section at
Ilford Animal Cemetery, because it was a near word for word copy of part of the article it was referenced to. Not knowing enough about the subject matter, I didn't feel able to replace it.
This has now been done by a different IP user, but it simply reinstates what I removed with some very minor differences. I'm unsure whether this is enough, to no later nger be an issue. I was going to bring this up on the articles talk page, but I noticed that you have blocked the original poster (
User:Iyo-farm)). One of the few additions to what I removed was
"Its later use for the Nazi Holocaust, was only applied from 1942", which highly similar to additions by Iyo-farm. So I thought I would seek you advice. Thanks
89.241.33.89 (
talk)
17:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
Solomon Linda - " Mbube".
A lot of the subsequent recording history of " Mbube" is pretty seedy, but something like justice was eventually done. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:44, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi. Given your previous involvement in a discussion regarding this user, I'm hoping it's not a problem for me to ask you to take a look at this new thread. Thanks in advance. Magitroopa ( talk) 17:07, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey El C, hope you're well. I didn't want to open an ANI for this, as it seemed the case here is obvious. Sorry if I'm wrong, but if you could, please take a look. This new account, Fullstackdev, keeps edit-warring and adding content back without any consensus, and which is being discussed in talk and AfD. They leave ethnically charged deranged comments in talk [225]. Some lovely quotes:
I think the Armenians who lost the war in Karabakh think that they will win with wikipedia special forces.
Armenians are chasing a dream again. On many pages on Wikipedia, I see only articles created with Armenian sources.
All your propaganda efforts will be in vain. It is a war indemnity given by Armenia for losing the Zangezur Corridor at the end of the 44-day war. You should get used to it by now.
Their vote text is just something else on its own. Hope I'm not disturbing, but this case seemed obvious to me. They also added propaganda sources in different articles, such as calling the Armenian genocide "the Armenian problem" (common denialistic talking point), and shifts the blame to Armenian political party of that time, Hunchakian. ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 18:09, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
I've just reverted another 18 unsourced/undiscussed mass genre changes by Bigfella77 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), their first edits since your block on the 2nd. They've still never discussed any of their edits. Time for an indef? -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 21:01, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
I think you should check for possible WP:STONEWALLING first, wouldn't it be better to try and deal with that? I think this is just going to lead to endless RfCs and drive editors away which is exactly what a stonewaller would want. NadVolum ( talk) 00:44, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C, in the process of closing the recent ARBIP amendment request I noticed that the obsolescence notice at WP:GS/IPAK still contained a placeholder permalink. Should this be updated just for maximum clarity? Thanks! firefly ( t · c ) 11:31, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
You probably know the famous English-French cover version - but this is the original, written and recorded by a Russian émigrée.
One of my better efforts was the enwiki biography of a résistant who got 12,000 views in WP:DYK; and another 3,250 last month, when - unprompted by me - he appeared in WP:OTD on the 78th anniversary of his death. (The median daily number is 3-4, more than for most of my articles.) Narky Blert ( talk) 22:25, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Please take a look here and revdel the offending revisions? This was in response to this thread at ANI. Cheers, RandomCanadian ( talk / contribs) 14:28, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
I recommend that the user Djm-leighpark not interfere with the second nomination process, as one of the similar articlespaces of the user has already been deleted with the same references ( Aerospace Research Systems, Inc.). I will look more into the user's activity in the near future to see if it warrants requesting to have the user blocked from possibly further vandalizing the encyclopedia.
Hi El C,
The protection that you put on Waun Mawn a few weeks ago has now lapsed, and with its lapse the "bearded ape" vandal has unfortunately returned. While they have only edited once as of this post, I see no reason why they won't resume their previous pattern; would it be possible for you to reinstate the protection, perhaps for longer this time?
BilledMammal ( talk) 10:55, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Fascinating Aïda - Cheap Flights. Narky Blert ( talk) 17:50, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello El_C. You page protected COVID-19 pandemic in Iran back in March 2020 under WP:GS/COVID19. However this page relies on two templates that remian unprotected, Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Iran medical cases & Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Iran medical cases chart. The first of which was vandalised today. I've reverted the vandalism, but was wondering if they should be protected as per the main article? Thanks 89.241.33.89 ( talk) 19:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Michael Tippett - " Steal Away" - link. It sounds like a difficult sing, there's a lot going on.
Off-topic, just to show I'm an old softy - Battle of Saragarhi.
[NB crosses his fingers that he's for once managed to post on this page without refactoring it.] Narky Blert ( talk) 21:01, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
@ El C: Hello, after some break another user (Marcelus) is causing chaos in article Coat of arms of Lithuania, thus this vital article requires urgent actions. Marcelus previously had also participated in Talk:Pahonia#RFC: Pahonia and opposed the solution which currently is a WP:CONS, so he belongs to the same anti-Lithuanian nationalistic gang which received sanctions previously. Today he single-handedly removed two well-referenced paragraphs from this extended-protected article ( 1). Could you please apply sanctions to him which includes removal of his extended rights? I believe such vandal does not belong to the reliable extended-level users group. -- Pofka ( talk) 16:59, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
I'm hoping to avoid the whole rigamarole of ANI over someone making personal attacks. Would you be willing to take a quick look and maybe give a warning? Other users already have warned them, but they respond to earnings with more personal attacks against me. I'm hoping a word from an admin might make a difference. I've left details out for now so you won't be bothered if you're not interested. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 22:41, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Check your email. Cheers - wolf 15:49, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
The evidence is in the page history, the current dispute taking place on the page and the account status of those involved in the dispute;
You yourself acknowledged these ip users in your log remarks: "To the individual or individuals behind the latest IPs: if you do not engage other disputants on the article talk page ... you will effectively be forfeiting your position.
", basically making the protection a part of the dispute. If they're not disrupting the page anymore than user A is, they shouldn't be locked out while User A isn't. If you felt the content dispute was so disruptive that protection was warranted to quell the disruption and force the parties to talk, then perhaps full-protection with admin-only access, would've been the way to go. But beyond that, you were notified at the RPP that User A had also just filed at DRN (I don't know if that construes forum shopping or not?), why not let that process play out?
Anyway, I'm not trying to get up in your grill, I honestly belive you're one of the few, very good admins we have. I also know there has been a strong push of late to treat ip users equally with registered users, and to be friendly and accommodating to new users and those not familiar with all the processes and rules here. This lock could be seen as favoring a regular, registered user, giving them ammo for their fight, while causing disenchantment among the other users. I'm just trying to keep things balanced, that's why I requested you take a second, closer look. Thank you - wolf 20:45, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
To the individual or individuals behind the latest IPs: if you do not engage other disputants on the article talk page ( Talk:United States Army Special Forces) you will effectively be forfeiting your position. Thanks.
Downgrade, lengthen protection. IPs: you may still engage the article talk page ( Talk:United States Army Special Forces) at any time, but since you've failed to do so thus far, now it's this
But, if the IP/s fail to engage the talk in, say, a couple of days, let me know and I'll convert to a longer semiprotection, yet this lengthened semiprotection still surprises you. How so? You also say that it was "obvious" that you mistook the full protection with a semi'd one, but it wasn't obvious to me. Yes, I looked at the history, but not in the way that necessarily aligns with the evidence that you say exist, and yet to produce (the burden is on you, since you made the "weaponizing" claim).
"Lengthy"? I kept them as short as I could just to address points in your subsequent replies. (And like said, this medium sucks) If I wanted to bring this to a noticeboard, I would've, but I haven't. I asked you about it, and then decided to drop it. That is still my decision. Now, hopefully this is short enough. Have a nice day. - wolf 15:44, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I want to let you know about an on-going disruptive editing by an IP at 2021 Facebook outage page. Thanks, WikiLinuz ( talk) 17:37, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
EDIT: Looks like they're also here, reverting your talk pages. WikiLinuz ( talk) 17:44, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
In 1939, the Daughters of the American Revolution refused Marian Anderson permission to sing in Constitution Hall because of because. An outdoor gig was arranged instead. This seems to be the only surviving footage.
My Oath, but she was good. " Deep River", " Erbarme dich". (If you don't know the latter, it's a meditation on St Peter's remorse after his betrayal.) Narky Blert ( talk) 18:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
I'm not feeling motivated to assist with this matter. Presumptuousness and hostility will tend to have that effect. El_C 16:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I thought I'd remind you of your actions here [226], [227], and invite you to check out this set of edits [228], [229], [230], [231]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.30.19.189 ( talk) 21:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
|
I don't understand what any of this has to do with me. There are noticeboards to lodge complaints at. If you look at WP:AEL, you'd see that I've sanctioned many users. It's presumptuous to expect me to follow up on each of them. And it's discreditable to make baseless accusations if I don't stand at attention. I'm not an employee of any of you. I am not an employee of Wikipedia. El_C 16:21, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Ok, I have a problem; an editor makes two edits to Katamon a few hours apart:
I believe the editor broke 1RR (and Katamon is under 1RR), the editor in question apparently does not believe so (see the talk page). If I am wrong, then please WP:TROUT me; if not: please help me explain to the editor in question that he is wrong. (And, btw; I am not looking to sanction the editor over this in any way; my "goal" is just to make him (or me??) understand 1RR; cheers, Huldra ( talk) 23:06, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Jenny presumably ended up the DDR after WWII, changed her name, gave up her former career, and succeeded in a new one.
An Austrian baroness has preserved her memory. Narky Blert ( talk) 18:16, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello El C,
on 25 September 2021 you protected the page Diesel engine for ten days – apparently, this was not long enough… [233] Best regards, -- Johannes ( Talk) ( Contribs) ( Articles) 13:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi there El C, how are you doing? Would you mind changing the short desc in Turkish War of Independence, as the page is still fully protected? Seems like nobody objects to my proposal in talk. Sincerely, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 07:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I think you closed the recent Arbcom issue about BLPTALK violations at Talk:Israel lobby in the United Kingdom, brought by a user now blocked as a sock, who had redacted material on the talk page. This has now been un-redacted under the justification "rv sock". Do you know what the status of the material is? Should it be redacted or not? (Context: the redacted links include to SPSs purporting to doxx WP editors.) Thanks! BobFromBrockley ( talk) 19:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
Poronkusema. Narky Blert ( talk) 02:59, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Please request to protect article some users spreading vandalism. Sush150 ( talk) 05:54, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. Sush150 ( talk) 08:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your admin work! Always appreciate your wikignoming and reading your insights in discussions. Thought I'd share a kitten for an underappreciated editor. Cheers!
A. C. Santacruz ⁂
Talk
08:35, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, I was wondering whether you think it worth me contesting my TBAN on the basis that the AE was written up by 11Fox11, a now condemned sockpuppet of Icewhiz,] and Geshem_Bracha supported by Geshem Bracha, another Icewhiz sockpuppet]? Clearly Icewhiz had no right to raise the AE itself, and, in hindsight, I was being pursued by a highly POV and experienced banned user gaming the system. I've tried to ask Callanecc, but I've just noticed they haven't been active since 14 October, and you have been more involved in AE cases since then. As you have noted, 11Fox11 subsequently withdrew their case against Selfstudier, though Icewhiz continued their efforts in the case raised by Hippeus in their case against ZScarpia. I think the fact that 11Fox11 raised an AE against me while another was still ongoing and without asking me to revert are definitely aspects of the case that now can be seen in a different light after the SPI. Iskandar323 ( talk) 06:46, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
Pokémonfanxyz is a sockpuppet of Pritam kumar roni das. Their editing interest is nearly same and see this. This sock will ultimately get extended access very soon and will again resume the disruptions especially to the page Mon Phagun and other TV shows. Other confirmed socks were Pritam das 01022000 and Pritam Das 2000. Please block them. Thank you 2402:3A80:6F7:FE71:DCD8:69CE:4DCB:3B58 ( talk) 16:43, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi can you please increase security level of Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, it's sovereignty is disputed with Morocoo and article is always under attack with vandalism and propaganda edits, This article should be indefinite semi-protected like Somaliland, Artsakh and other. Ytpks896 ( talk) 21:01, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
Sheesh, first a cywiki and now a viwiki 'crat indeffed from enwiki? What is it with these people, and some of the smaller Wikipedias? I suppose all we can do is encourage editors fluent in other languages to beef up their own Wikipedias, in the hope of building critical masses there (all puns intended). (I tried and failed with KIENGIR, but so it goes.) Hoping that WMF will do anything is like farting down a well and listening for the splash. </rant> Narky Blert ( talk) 22:30, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
WWII, about Lyudmila Pavlichenko (the Soviets favoured female snipers, as being more lethal than men) - Miss Pavlichenko.
Typical Woody song - catchy tune, socially aware (if atypically bloodthirsty) lyrics. Serious props to the guy on the fansite who spotted that obscure tune's reuse by a British post-punk band. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:37, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
It sounds like a class rant but it's really because I am the landlord of the pub that gets the cemetery— fuckin' brilliant!
The only one? That's good,
Narky Blert. Stay innocent! I'm not gonna be the one to introduce you to
horrorcore (probably). And speaking of being more lethal than men
, and in keeping to that promise, Smallz One is one
Narcissistic Bitch (WARNING - DISTURBING CONTENT) you do not want to encounter in some proverbial alley...
El_C
22:05, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
If time permits, can you take a look there? One editor closed a RM, one of the participants reverted the closure. The closer reverted suggesting a move review request, the other editor reverted again. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 20:45, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
Licensing problems, perhaps? This track never seems to have made its way onto any Greatest Hits by the Clovers compilation. Narky Blert ( talk) 18:06, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
I’m afraid the editor whose request to fully protect the page you accepted is acting in bad faith. Please, check the revision he was continually reverting. He is also biased and obsessed with adding Cristiano Ronaldo’s 2017 celebration to the history section, despite the lack of reliable sources confirming it had a lasting impact on the rivalry. Even so, despite my objections I kept his additions with slight modifications and that too was reverted before he complained to admins citing non-existent “vandalism”. Trackfan20 ( talk) 06:14, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Small request: on WP:ITNN, I moved a ready mark from the prose to the headers, but still nothing, - the whole thing (not only that article) hasn't moved in 4 days. The person (28 Sep) died the same day as the one who has been top for these days, and there were no major changes needed for him as well, - it looks unfair. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:41, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
I may have spoken too soon, - one more was moved in. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:43, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
... and now Amakuru moved him in as well - one of these days I want to turn to Psalm 15, - I hope they'll stop dying -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:54, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Story: Once, kid me and a friend almost drowned in the Sea of Galilee. We swam stupidly and then the currents did not want to be our friend. After so many hours, we basically just stopped trying to fight it and focused on conserving the energy needed just to stay afloat. These kinds of currents are the main cause of drownings (usually due to exhaustion), with a few happening a year, and a few tens needing rescue. But anyway, then the current took us home (to shore), where much relief/freakout was had by all (military got scrambled for the search, it was intense). *** Nice pics! When Cow Man approves of a sunset, you know it's a sunset. El_C 14:35, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
Billy Bragg - " The World Turned Upside Down", about the Diggers. Narky Blert ( talk) 15:36, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
You have mail. - wolf 04:07, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
I see you protected the pages we had edit war on. I wonder if this will check what is written in the edit war. I hope it won’t remain the last thing he wrote, because I didn’t want to give back anymore. I hope he will write correctly, that there will not be something left that is not true and vandalism. Please someone check out these 3 articles and decide what exactly is there. Thank you 89.172.36.162 ( talk) 05:16, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello there! Apologies for removing on this User talk:103.144.225.75 page that my sig color is blue. I didn't know that it was a joke when you said that but yes.. I'd also laugh when I saw your reasoning why you edited back so yeah. Cornerstone2.0 ( talk) 06:32, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
While we're on the subject of Agitpop, the album which this song is from (released a year-and-a-half before Thatcher took office!) achieved a heady #144 on Billboard, so you may not know it. If you feel inclined, you can mouth "and me" during the pause. (I've still got the original album, and the stencil that came with it.) Narky Blert ( talk) 16:54, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I didn't understand your message "Technically unable to do so (only delete button displays for this page)." I'm thinking something to do with an admin tool? Is there any workaround? (page: User:DaxServer/BooksToSfn.js) — DaxServer ( talk) 18:49, 29 October 2021 (UTC)
Do you think this qualifies for revdel? Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:39, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
I came across this editor's userpage earlier today and redacted sensitive information. I just wanted to stop by here and say that the information I saw lead me to believe that this editor will be not as disruptive two years from now. I would have been the same way just a couple years ago. I gave them some advice. Feel free to respond if you don't think it was good. I am not sure if you were aware (you probably were). Scorpions13256 ( talk) 04:40, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Gary U.S. Bonds - Love's on the Line".
Good album. Useful backing band (I miss the horn player). Narky Blert ( talk) 06:31, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi El_C, I hope you're doing well! Thanks for the ongoing song recs
Just wanted to let you know that your protection at
El Clásico recently expired. Thanks,
DanCherek (
talk)
11:52, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for protecting Battle of Chosin Reservoir, Hungnam evacuation. I also request similar protection of Second Phase Offensive and UN retreat from North Korea which have been experiencing similar issues. Mztourist ( talk) 15:32, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
berating: I need diffs+quotes — it isn't really reasonable to expect me to read a lengthy talk page. I'm sorry, I just don't have the time. Anyway, if you've reached an impasse on the article talk page, maybe get a Third opinion...? Unfortunately, this isn't an area with which I am especially familiar. El_C 16:29, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
www.royal-irish.com confusesand whether it is even a reliable source — not sure on both counts. El_C 16:37, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Hey! UTRS appeal #50241. I be praising the Lord and asking him to deliver this poor soul form their, well you done seen it. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:10, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
The Equestrian Statue of Marcus Aurelius in Rome owes its preservation on the Campidoglio to the popular mis-identification of Marcus Aurelius, the philosopher-emperor, with Constantine the Great, the Christian emperor.
I just hope those jugs didn't hold jake. Narky Blert ( talk) 20:54, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
El C, editor Pritam kumar roni das has again started editing from new account Serialbongo evident from their editing pattern and interests (They both have uploaded TV serial posters without licenses, editing List of Pokémon anime characters, and adding unverified information to Star Jalsha and Zee Bangla TV shows. For reference, User_talk:El_C#Sockpuppetry. Thanks. 42.106.236.200 ( talk) 15:39, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, hope you're doing well. Not to disturb you, but I honestly didn't think I should be even bringing obvious troll and ethnically charged cases to ANI. A while back, an edit-warring IP from Van cat started personally and racially attacking me in their talk page. I tried to inform the admin who previously protected the page, but I got no response. Today I wake up to see the IP follow me and rant under my post in the admin's page, again with the same weird ethnic and racially charged attacks/assumptions. The IPs "contributions to the project are mainly edit-wars in Van cat using different with different ranges [235], [236], [237]. I would very much appreciate if you could take a look. Regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 07:11, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Hey El C, just wanted to let you know that the user Çerçok continues with the same behavioral motive after his ban - WP:IDHT, tried to add WP:COATRACK material and accusing about omitting intentionally certain people etc. [238]. I know that WP:BALKANS policies are very strict with disruptive users so could you have a look? Thanks Othon I ( talk) 21:58, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Regrettably, there seems to be no early recording of this piece of caustic social commentary: " They're Moving Father's Grave to Build a Sewer"; clearly English music hall, if I'm any judge.
I've known the tune they segue into at the end, " My Old Man (Said Follow the Van)" since I was a child. (A song about a moonlight/midnight flit; we have no article; a house move out of office hours, performed the day before the rent collector brought the bailiffs in.) It was most famously sung by the great Marie Lloyd, for whom see Marie Lloyd#Risqué reputation and transatlantic tours 1st para. Narky Blert ( talk) 23:30, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
I was recently emailed through WP by a Nigerian editor. I did my own checks - and it seems that he really is someone who liked one of my articles and wants help in improving his editing skills, rather than being a prince who just needs some ready cash to unlock his family's fortune. So, I gave him what advice I could, rather than forwarding the email to ARBCOM with a satirical covering note.
Anyway, the experience reminded me of this classic from 2002. I don't have the patience to run that sort of exchange, but admire anyone who does. Enjoy! Narky Blert ( talk) 19:17, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
User Aj Indiana was blocked for 2 weeks by you on 15:03, 15 October 2021 for being disruptive and edit warring [239]. After 2 weeks, user didn't change his attitude and has been constantly involved in edit warring where multiple users have warned him on his talk page. He was again blocked on 16:11, 30 October 2021 for a period of 36 hrs [240]. But again the user has continued edit warring on multiple pages including Ranjit Singh where he inserts disputed information with unreliable sources and extremely poor grammar. He has been referred to take discussion to talk page where the topic is in place but he ignores it and continues to revert changes as he seems appropriate. Here is the latest warning he received [241] but still user isn't showing any improvement. He needs to be blocked indefinitely. Three times is a strike. MehmoodS ( talk) 20:04, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. But looks like the user created another account Mohmood20 [244] and he is using it to impersonate me. Even going as far as redirecting his account to mine [245]. This is clear that his intention is to jeopardize my account. I have reported him on sockpuppet investigation. [246]. But any quick assistance in blocking account of Mohmood20 indefinitely would be the right solution. Fact that he redirected the page to mine is clear violation. MehmoodS ( talk) 09:29, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. Sorry, I wasn't close to PC so sent message via phone. But I will make note of it. Thanks again. MehmoodS ( talk) 12:12, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, would you mind giving your input as a third opinion in this discussion? Regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 09:36, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for edit protecting the article I requested, I thought indefinitely would be better but it was my first protection request so I just went for what’s happened to the page previously. Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia DirkJandeGeer ( talk) 16:00, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
The original, for reference purposes.
Balding old man sticks his foot on the monitor and the kids in his backing band melt into puddles of sweat. Narky Blert ( talk) 18:50, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
in relation this to your block of user 49.180.171.190 and that user’s request for unblock, [247], [248], would you mind taking a closer look and seeing if the ip user is the same person as User:Nvtuil and User:Sinwiki12? Like the ip user, nvtuil has been editing exclusively from a mobile device and on his user homepage also says he is from australia. When it comes to Sinwiki12 the ip user seems to suggest that he is the same person as the registered user in this edit [249] and draws on a spelling convention that is specific to Australian English - note the use of the word s instead of z [250]. All three users share the same geopolitical points of view, have edited on the same pages (this is what tipped me off that they might be the same person) and consistently fail to write content in a neutral way by not attributing the things they are writing to the authors and works that they are using. I don’t know if impersonating accounts or this sort of thing is allowed and what the penalties are but i have to think there has to be something that can be done about it given the tremendous amount of disruption that this type of activity can cause to the encyclopedia Estnot ( talk) 06:58, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
Elvis Costello & The Attractions - (What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding.
A cover, but IMAO greatly superior to the original by Brinsley Schwarz - a tighter band, and Elvis' producer avoided the *lightbulb* ideas of adding BVs at the words "sweet harmony" and the maudlin spoken bit for the benefit of anyone who hasn't been paying attention.
There's an entertaining video of The Boss playing it live, during which assorted people (perhaps attracted in from the street outside by the racket?) wander onto the stage to sing a line or two each. (The relentless drummer ruins it for me, though.) Narky Blert ( talk) 21:24, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know, I did actually miss that link at the very bottom. However I don't think we should restore the text since the first half is a copyvio of the linked source, and the rest (everything after "In reality...") appears to be original research. I didn't warn the user for unsourced content but I think I should maybe put a notice about copyright. RA0808 talk contribs 00:43, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
The movie is based on real life incidents which happened in the 1990s in Cuddalore district of Tamil Nadu and the accused police man in the real incident did not belong to Vanniyar community— news18 needs to hire better writers! El_C 00:56, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
I saw your block of ArtaXerxes58 and their socks, [251] and I noticed a new user, Al Ameer27.6. Said new user's edits oddly mirror ArtaXerxes58 and their socks.
Your thoughts? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 18:06, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
This is what user:D.Lazard posted, straight off the bat (under a feigned "third opinion" comment [252]), in reponse to user:HistoryofIran at the Talk:Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi page.
"HistoryofIran disputes this edit. In this disputes, HistoryofIran uses only procedural arguments, whithout discussing whether King's opinion is notable enough for being mentioned in Wikipedia. Moreover the name "HistoryofIran" suggest that he is not neutral on this subject, and that he is here for pushing Iran's official point of view (possible WP:COI)."
I find this to be a pretty gross violation of WP:NPA, WP:BATTLE and WP:AGF. - LouisAragon ( talk) 22:08, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Stop sniggering at the back! Narky Blert ( talk) 20:15, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
The Only Ones - " Another Girl, Another Planet" - video - Peel session (not a carbon copy). It turned up in Peel's Festive Fifty (listener-voted) 1978-1982 and 2000, but commercially sank without trace.
The band reformed in the 2000s, but the singer's voice was totally shot. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:03, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Hello, can you please protect this page Islamic State – Khorasan Province because if you look at the page history you will see anonymous users keep removing huge content from the page and this has caused an edit War. 197.52.28.131 ( talk) 10:40, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Gavin Bryars - Jesus' Blood Never Failed Me Yet - link.
Bonus #1 - link. I'd love to know who scripted that, and whose idea it was - I suspect they asked TW on, and he improvised most of it.
Bonus #2 - Tom Waits - " Downtown Train" - link. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:58, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Greetings El C due to continuous disruptive editing recently the Vuk Karadžić page was protected but it did not stopped with vandalism. This "new" IP Special:Contributions/93.138.19.195 started their edit warring on that page with the same behaviour on Mate Parlov page. Can something be done. Thank you. User:Theonewithreason ( talk) 13. November 2021 (UTC)
Hi User:El_C in relation your block on User:49.180.171.190 (background information: [253] and [254]) can you take a look at user 49.228.19.151’s edits ( Special:Contributions/49.228.19.151) and see if they might be related? Both ip users have
1) made their first series of edits on the encyclopedia by tracking my previous edits across multiple articles (49.180.171.190 followed by edits on Wilson Sporting Goods, Concerns over Chinese involvement in 5G wireless networks, Meng Wanzhou, Extradition case of Meng Wanzhou [255]; 49.228.19.151 followed my edits on Chen Shih-chung and the United States [256])
2) made baseless allegations against me (49.180.171.190 has accused me vandalism [257] & [258]; 49.228.19.151 has accused me of canvassing [259]
3) showed intricate knowledge of editing policies of the encyclopedia despite being “new” editors (49.180.171.190’s third edit on the encyclopedia makes reference to wp:blp [260]; 49.228.19.151 second edit makes reference to wp:canvassing [261])
4) addresses which geolocate to the same region (both start with 49) which suggests the same person is editing on both accounts using a proxy server.
I also do recall encountering an editor who used the exact term “gish galloping” on another China related article but cannot at this moment recall which one specifically at this moment.
I’m sorry to bother you again but (once again) your help here would be most welcome Estnot ( talk) 12:41, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Richard Thompson - " Turning of the Tide". Narky Blert ( talk) 18:11, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Please I request you to block this 182.56.210.144 ip address. Doing unsourced edits. Sush150 ( talk) 07:19, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
The ip address is doing repeated unsource edits in Badhaai Do, Atrangi Re, Bachchan Pandey, Raksha Bandhan, Jug Jugg Jeeyo, Thank God, Radhe Shyam and Rocky Aur Rani Ki Prem Kahani film articles. Sush150 ( talk) 07:25, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. Sush150 ( talk) 11:13, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
You've got one of this great man's best-known songs in your spamlist; here's a little-known one, from the end of his career. (The second-last verse was prophetic.)
For balance, here's one by his great rival. (The sleeve credits Johnny Winter for "miscellaneous screaming".) Narky Blert ( talk) 12:39, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Hey there, it’s been a second, I hope you are fine and In good health, quick one here, In hindsight you always called diffs in mobile format your weakness, needless to say you sure as hell don’t like mobile format diffs & you have (positively?) corrupted me and I try to de-mobilize every diff I make. Recently I used a diff in mobile format see here & @ Ritchie333 converted it to desktop format, and user the word “conventional” which I thought was quite funny & made me laugh, I might have asked you before(I’m not so sure) but my question is what is the fundamental difference between the both? R333 please I’d be happy to hear from you as well. Celestina007 ( talk) 12:45, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Greetings,
I got curious with long list of warning messages to the IP over the years Special:Contributions/202.142.177.7. It is relatively minor spam cases once in a while but consistently over the years. Seem to be a static IP.
Usually I don't feel like recomonding blocking IPs and Users, so I did not report directly @ notice board. May be you can look into it with your experience better .
Thanks
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 17:57, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, that what I thought.
Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' ( talk) 00:29, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
Wow, that was really not excellent. In indefinitely blocking a 15-year editor, you cited WP:BLUDGEON, which is not only an essay, but a largely stupid essay which says, among other things, "Typically, the [bad, bludgeoning] person replies to almost every '!vote' or comment, arguing against that particular person's point of view. The person attempts to pick apart each argument with the goal of getting each person to change their '!vote'". This is presented as bad behavior (!), and I guess it's bad enough to get kicked off the project (!!). What the heck is AfD supposed to be for if it's not to present facts and arguments to persuade.
But wait. The blocked editor's (supposedly horrible, blockable) efforts were at a Deletion Review advocating for the overturn of a deletion, where the deletion was indeed overturned and supporting an article at an AfD where the article is going to be kept. (It looks like, tho maybe not cos you've, I don't know, kicked out a key editor addressing objections to the article, altho you could have waited.) So it's not like he was wrong. That matters.
I haven't looked at your WP:NPA allegation in detail, but its for sure that Supermann was goaded quite a bit (including by a sock at one point). I do think he rose to the bait and got more testy (and arch) at times then you'd like to see. Other editors were worse, I think... and goading is not a good look. Sorting all this out fairly and correctly would take scores of man-hours which is why I recommended leaving it alone since there was a fair amount of bad acting all around, tempers got a little bit inflamed as happens, but no serious violations of any rules were made (essays aren't rules), and nothing that couldn't be handled locally and it's not going to be a running sore cos the AfD is going to be closed soon.
But you think different I guess, and your call. Wrong call, but I understand; I know the admin corps is super overworked and all, and of course you're going to make rash, poorly considered actions when you're tired and stressed. But I mean if you didn't have the time to do it right, you didn't have to do anything. So I mean if you want to reflect on that, that'd be great IMO, but up to you. Herostratus ( talk) 19:42, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing. Specifically, WP:BATTLEGROUND conduct (at times testing the boundaries of WP:NPA, if not exceeding it outright) and WP:BLUDGEON to excess.In any case, I've reopened that ANI thread, so you're welcome to bring your concerns for wider review. El_C 20:06, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi User:El_C in relation to your block of User:Supermann and also User:Lolitart [262], it appears that they are sockpuppet accounts. Both accounts:
Can you look into this issue in a bit more detail? Estnot ( talk) 04:45, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
I'm feeling old. My PC is acting old (mofoboard problem I suspect). While I'm trying to sort that issue out, Monteverdi's " Toccata" (1607) just doesn't get old. Narky Blert ( talk) 22:14, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C could you advise why you asked that I not alter a title? My understanding from WP:SECTIONHEADINGOWN is that “It is generally acceptable to change headings when a better heading is appropriate, e.g., one more accurately describing the content of the discussion or the issue discussed”
The only reason the title was not set this way originally was my human error. My
thread open starts with This is a behavioral issue from two editors
so it seemed appropriate to correct my error to make it clear to whom it refers. Is there a reason we shouldn’t adjust headings on AN/ noticeboards generally? Thanks
Cambial —
foliar❧
19:40, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C, you protected McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II back in October from an IP user that refused to discuss their changes. The user has returned to make the same edits as before. See Special:Contributions/210.185.97.52, which locates to the same city as Special:Contributions/203.221.79.237 and the others. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BilCat ( talk • contribs)
![]() |
In November, I can offer some reading, - three feast days in a row, reformation followed by All Saints' and All Souls. On All Saints, we sang in choir in a mass - a 2021 first - and rehearsed (with the other group) for the next such thing next Sunday. All Souls is the birthday of the subject of my first article who will play a major concert on 14 November. Today we "celebrate" the first DYK for which LouisAlain laid the base in a German sandbox, - needlessly complicated but working. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:48, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Library hijinks:
//And... scene. How am I not finished this book yet? I gotta stop being Busi-ness Man and start being Reading Man again. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ El_C 00:41, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
BTW, finally finished Rome: A History in Seven Sackings last week. New book: Matt Taibbi's Hate Inc. (2019). El_C 13:51, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed you applied full protection to the article. I requested indefinite pending changes protection because the article (like other India-Pakistan topics) is prone to vandalism like this. The content dispute in question has died down and consensus has been reached (and one of the parties has been taken to ARE), so a whole week of full protection seems a bit too extreme. Cipher21 (talk) 13:12, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
ARE page. Anyway, maybe get some outside input into the content dispute, like a WP:3O or WP:RSN. I'm sorry, but I'm not really available to help with that myself at this time. El_C 17:54, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Then start an WP:RFC, I dunno. But a content opponent of yours in this dispute, Suthasianhistorian8, has not been banned at WP:AE. I'm not going to modify the protection right now. Why are you expending so much energy on that? It hasn't even been a day. El_C 05:35, 21 November 2021
Someone, firstly as an IP editor and then with an account created for the purpose of continuing reverts, is changing sourced content. Three editors, including me, have asked them to not change sourced content and provide reliable sources for their own claim. However, they have persisted, and maybe a short semi protection is needed. Ktrimi991 ( talk) 13:02, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to your new computer! Please confirm that you own your primary email acct by entering the security code we have sent to your secondary email acct. Welcome to your new computer! Please confirm that you own your secondary email acct by entering the security code we have sent to your primary email acct. I think that's one for tomorrow. Meanwhile, I'm setting up everything I like under a pseudonym, whose DoB may or may not be correct but which allows me to access adult content. J'ai changé cent fois de nom. All I need now is a spurious cellphone number to confirm my identity.
Meanwhile, I've been listening to:
Hi! As you're probably aware you banned me earlier in the month from ANI for CIR (justifiably so). I have recently been the target of personal attacks at an AfD I started here, by Roxy the dog. I wish to de-escalate the situation but I don't reallly know how. I don't have any bad will against them and recently buried the hatchet with them. I asked a few times to see if the other user would apologize and stay on-topic to the discussion but they have not, and don't know what else to do without escalation (especially since this might be affecting other users as well). Santacruz ⁂ Please tag me! 16:34, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
{{no ping|Roxy the dog}}. El_C 12:05, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi everyone. Sorry, but some stuff came up, so I'm a bit pressed for time for the next little while — it's quite possible I overlooked something important. Still, a couple of notes, FWIW. A._C._Santacruz, I'm not seeing personal attacks in that AfD (Nov 23), and certainly not harassment, Bilby (again, maybe I missed it). Granted, Roxy the dog's criticism of your [A. C. Santacruz], uh, content focus (?) isn't particularly gentle. But is gentle always better? When you asked Roxy for an WP:APOLOGY (Nov 6), that read awkwardly to me. I'm sorry to say, but it comes across as misdirected at best and a provocation at worst (which I'm sure wasn't your intent). In general, I'm of the view that forced/requested apologies are rarefy if ever a good idea. I'd probably respond in the negative to such a request had it been directed to me, tbh.
Still, admittedly, I am not entirely unbiased here as I've always been firmly on the camp of the pro-science editors (regulars at WP:FTN, etc.). Like, with the section you've linked to ( User_talk:Roxy_the_dog#Questions) that seems to be about Roxy resisting attempts to remove the pseudoscience descriptor from the Astrology page, even though the WP:ARBPS talk page notice {{Ds/talk notice|topic=ps}} is at the top of its talk page. Anyway, I think ScottishFinnishRadish advise about de-escalation was pretty good, at least for now.
Sorry, that's all the time I can really expend to this right now. Other admins' mileage may vary. @ Wugapodes: maybe help out with this one, too...? If you do, I'm willing to illegally campaign for your ArbCom candidacy. I already have a good slogan: Opabinia regalis has failed the cat community — a vote for Wugapodes is a vote for kittens! El_C 12:05, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
ape— he said
went ape at ANI over it. That's just normal slang to 'going overboard', excess, etc. In fact, I'm reading Hate Inc. right now and Taibbi uses that exact phrase in a way that, to me, comes across as relatively inoffensive (I'll see if I can find the quote, since it was just a few pages ago). Anyway, I'm not sure what you want me to do.
being targeted by anti-pseudoscience editors around here is really being branded as pro-fringe just for disagreeing with themhere,
I just noticed that ScottishFinnishRadish is not only at war with GSoW, but is actively supporting Fringe. They removed pertinent criticism info from the BLP of "medium" Thomas John Flanagan, including the summary of his felony conviction from the lead.That was because I removed clear BLPvio here and here. I don't know if that is harassment, but it's certainly WP:BATTLEGROUND and uncivil. Also, that article could probably do with some revdel. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 14:47, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
Paul Robeson - " Ol' Man River" - link.
It is a cause for enduring regret that Robeson only recorded one of Dvořák's ten Biblical Songs - " By the Waters of Babylon" (in the original Czech, yet).
Am I right in thinking this may be to your taste, or is that pie in the sky?
{added) a historical document by Harry K. McClintock. Narky Blert ( talk) 22:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
That Showboat clip is remarkable for 1936. Even years later (to at least Hellzapoppin', 1941), Hollywood films would include a toe-curling musical interlude in which a group of darkies would discover a piano on the set and hold an impromptu dance party.
Neither the hymn nor the parody is well-known in UK; but " pie in the sky" is long-established idiom (from at least the 1950s to my knowledge). I'd make a small wager that "The P and the S" had been brought over by a labo(u)r activist, and that those Scottish miners knew both the song and who Joe Hill was.
The most unexpected articles can get serious numbers of views. When I wrote C. Austin Miles, I never expected 20 views/day; nor anywhere near 17 for the Dvořák cycle. Narky Blert ( talk) 20:49, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
I've been told obtaining consensus is a blockable offence, and in the same discussion asked by the same person and another editor they tagged to do the opposite. Now I'm confused. Cipher21 (talk) 18:30, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
blocked/banned for disruption, either (by TrangaBellam). I presume it's due to... reasons. And I wouldn't worry about that
Filing an edit request to reinstate deleted content is cheeky. If it gets reported to admins they will take a dim view of it(by Kautilya3). I just presume you didn't know that this isn't what edit requests are for.
Godley & Creme - " Under Your Thumb". One of the very few ghost stories in popular song. Narky Blert ( talk) 00:36, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C! I'd like to ask for your help with an edit war at Talk:Ali#problematic_edits. Thanks! Albertatiran ( talk) 08:16, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Temporary semi-protection: persistent IP vandalism due to emergence of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant after expiry of protection has resumed. Already asked at WP:RfPP yesterday, but seems fo lks are busy. Thanks 2402:3A80:6C1:96A:9464:D5D3:4371:B576 ( talk) 04:04, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Steve Winwood - " Arc of a Diver" - link
He was so disgustingly talented that he had a UK #1 at age 15 with " Keep on Running" - link. (I prefer the cover to the original, but only just.)
(Another Steve scored a US #1 at age 13 - link.)
Bonus track, because I'm feeling generous today. ( This is the song being parodied.) Narky Blert ( talk) 23:23, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
I will be appealing my topic ban at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard SecretName101 ( talk) 00:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
I want to express to you, not out of anger, but disappointment, that it hurts you so quickly reached a “no” decision.
I am far less disappointed that you want to retain that topic ban than I am at why and how you are reaching and justifying said judgement.
I had already, long before, acknowledged to you the I now recognized the article was “overwhelmingly negative” in those exact words, yet you penalize me for not repeating myself on it? I said I would submit ANY negative-leaning article on marginal figures for review first, that EXCEEDS your concern. Yet you flag that as unsatisfactory.
You judged me solely on outlying mistakes, and utterly ignored longstanding and continued positive contribution to the project.
You had urged me to make edits to show I am valuable to the project. I make over 1,000 edits on a variety of subjects, and you do not even acknowledge them.
These topic bans are to prevent threats of disprution to the project. Not to punish. You have not based your arguments on what threat of disruption I would actively pose.
And we had been over that I didn’t, at the time, see politicians having a different format than other BLP on crimes. Yet you played ignorant to our previous discussion on that.
You also have reignited a micro aggression towards me, and are seeking to penalize me for having not sat silent when that initial micro aggression occurred. Characterizing people who fail to recognize the exact same patterns as others as incompetent IS a clear micro aggression towards neurodiverse individuals. SecretName101 ( talk) 02:52, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
that it hurts you so quickly reached a “no” decision, but in any case, I'd rather the discussion not be split (yet again: [270] [271]), so please incorporate any arguments you see fit toward your appeal, rather than doing so here. Thank you. El_C 03:08, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
Back in 2019, you put an editnotice in place regarding the listing of victim names. I assume this wasn't the 1st time or the last. What criteria goes into making that decision? Just curious since another one is being debated again. Thanks -- GoneIn60 ( talk) 09:31, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Jacques Brel - " Au suivant".
No subs on that, but there's a version in English by Scott Walker, a very good interpreter of Brel - " Next". Narky Blert ( talk) 20:08, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C. I'm wondering whether the special editing restrictions from March this year on Dabaqabad are still in effect atm. I looked into this concurrently after they appeared to snub the consensus translation of four Italian-speaking editors on a Caroselli book, subsequently edited by user Lambian : ( link), an action they repeated here, in both cases without a talk page comment. Then I saw this article's history; they made reverts in November without a talk page comment, and again on the 5th of December without a talk page comment; this appears to me to be a snub of their ARBHORN restrictions. In their talk page comments they also smeared Jama Omar Issa as prejudiced, thus unreliable, for a typo he made in 1976 when the Somali script was 4 years old ( link), even though he has been peer reviewed 113 times per google scholar. Before this thread, I was wondering if its allowed to unarchive the currently archived case. Heesxiisolehh ( talk) 06:47, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi El C long time no talk, hope you're doing well. I had concerns regarding a user you have tbanned from AA. Following the tban of DriedGrape and their subsequent tban violation block, they have edited AA content again: [275], [276]. First diff they added an Azerbaijani name, and in second diff they removed a bunch of sourced info regarding Armenia. Hoping that you could take a look. Best regards, ZaniGiovanni ( talk) 12:08, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Hey, El C. Hope you're well. Can you close a report I filed at SPI: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Solomon155? The sockmaster account and the sock are revert-warring together and they're adding information which is not discussed by the bibliography. If all articles targeted by them were permanently semi-protected or required autoconfirmed status it'd be even better.-- Maleschreiber ( talk) 00:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Can you please review and close the discussion at Talk:Oxford High School shooting#Names_of_victims? My initial request was going to be at the seven day mark, but another editor suggested "7-10 days", so I leave it to you to decide the best time, but I believe given our prior interactions nobody would ever suggest you were biased in any way towards my position in these discussions. If not you, could you recommend an admin with a history of closing contentious discussions? Thank you! — Locke Cole • t • c 06:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Boccherini - Guitar Quintet No. 4 - " Fandango".
I myself will attempt the invocation - " Gerda, Gerda! Wache, erwache!"
(I don't think I could get Silvia Duran through WP:NBIO, but she's mentioned at Dance in Israel#Flamenco.) Narky Blert ( talk) 22:11, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
A couple of weeks ago you salted Anwar Shah Orakzai. While NPP reviewing, I found that it was re-created today as Anwar Shah Orakzai (Journalist). Would it be beneficial to salt that one too, as well as the lowercase Anwar Shah Orakzai (journalist). Curbon7 ( talk) 07:31, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Please protect Breast tax. CoachEzhupunna ( talk) 08:10, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
What connects the following?
![]() | This list is
incomplete; you can help by
adding missing items. |
Hints available on request. Narky Blert ( talk) 21:47, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I have created an article called " Council of Troyes (1129)". However, there is a page Synods held at Troyes that redirects any Council of Troyes to that particular article. Is there anyway to remove the redirect for " Council of Troyes (1129)"? Or some other solution? -- Kansas Bear ( talk) 00:52, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
#REDIRECT [[Synods held at Troyes]] {{R with possibilities}}is deleted. The reason I ask is that’s what I would have done so if there’s somethng wrong wth doing that it would be good to know. DeCausa ( talk) 08:48, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
You protected the page earlier and you did it again but I just want you to know that you will see such disruptions only on List of converts to Islam from Hinduism and and not vice-versa. Kindly see Category:Lists_of_religious_converts_-_possibly_widespread_BLPvios where you can clearly check admin Black Kite's comments about it. I have also experienced that a handful of editors (some of whom are blocked already [277] follow this pattern to edit war, sometimes with false edit summaries, [278] without checking the sources [279] and they do it just to get the page protected from editing.
In the ANI discussion, if you spare 5 mintues and read this incident, you will see my edits to the page were all adequetly sourced and comply with BLPCAT whereas the other editor's edit summaries were not true and several other editors have commented on that.
This has been happening agian and again and it is quite exhaustive to contribute further when you have to explain these things to such editors who clearly have a vandetta and keep removing the edits. As an admin, can you please honestly suggest me a way to fix the problem permanently to keep Wikipedia unbiased and so that I can contribute in other areas? Thanks. -- Bringtar ( talk) 17:08, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Why was this protected? It's only used on two pages, so is not high-risk. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:11, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
I obviously haven't looked at the whole list, but the entries I *have* looked at that were removed look well sourced. I think you may have have unwittingly backed up a religious warrior there. Black Kite (talk) 18:32, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Just as an update, with
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of religious converts now live (which I added to
WP:CENT as it involves over 25 pages), the argument about bio cruft seems broader than just this one page. And calling the OP a religious warrior
may have missed the mark. Because it's valid to argue against bio cruft just as it is to argue that these lists have value to readers. Hopefully, the deletion discussion can clarify on which side of consensus (or lack thereof) these arguments fall. Anyway, what I'm getting at is that this seems to be a legit position for the OP to advance. (Personally, I don't know enough about these lists to favour any one side.)
El_C
14:36, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
The IP user involved in the dispute at the article Lithuania–Taiwan relations, which you've recently temporarily protected, is actually in trouble for numerous offences, not just relating to that article. In fact, they probably should have already been blocked days ago for other reasons, but they've been able to get away with even further wrongdoings due to a lack of attention from other administrators (the only administrator who has been commenting on my case for a while has been David Gerard). David Gerard has already temporarily protected the article China–Lithuania relations from the same IP user (it's a different IP address but the user has been IP-hopping; Wikipedia:Sock). A case at ANI has already been opened up by me in order to address a personal attack that this IP user has thrown out at me prior to the bulk of their disruptive editing. The user is guilty of:
— Jargo Nautilus ( talk) 06:32, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Hey El C! I noticed you put a month of semiprotection on this talk page back on October 2, per an RFPP request. I personally don't mind semiprotection of talk pages if there is a good reason, which there is in this case. Especially since WP:ARBR&I applies. So consider this my vote for a renewal of the semiprotection, in case you were considering it. Maybe even 3 to 6 months. I'm writing to you instead of just doing protection myself in case you are aware of other discussions on this idea, either in favor or against it. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 04:02, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi, El_C. I have noticed that you are less active in DS than you were, but could you take an unbiased look at [[[Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement#Maneesh|this]]]? I'm not special pleading for you to "take my side" - which I know isn't how you roll - but that specific situation seems to be generally spiralling and could use some "new" eyes, I think. Just if you get a chance. Newimpartial ( talk) 13:21, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
I'm not special pleading for you to "take my side", you're still reaching out to a specific admin to look at a thread with three other admins commenting because you'd think it
could use some "new" eyes. It's really not a good look that you're seeking specific admin attention at WP:AE, especially because you don't seem satisfied with the three sets of admin eyes already looking into it. ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk) 13:56, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
wallowing, well then, our perceptions differ. And I don't see how my reaching out to a specific admin whom I know only because they subjected me to an IBAN years ago is in any way against policy. There certainly isn't any reason to think El_C would be biased in my favor. I would just like to see more eyes on the filing, so it doesn't get bogged down in proceduralism, etc. Newimpartial ( talk) 14:15, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
76.30.143.210 ( talk · contribs · WHOIS)
Heads up, this user that you blocked appears to be misusing their talkpage access. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:95E8:4DB9:3862:F374 ( talk) 20:57, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I just saw that you seemingly pinged me (and others) at someone else's talk page, and advised us not to make further comments exceeding the word limit. I didn't get that ping and didn't see that until just now after I added more comments. I actually had forgotten that AE had word limits for commentors. It's hard for me with AE and other heavy disputes because I feel like I need to address and refute various claims, but at the same time I don't want to turn the thread into a TL;DR and scare off the fresh eyes that are most needed. So, sorry about that. Crossroads -talk- 07:45, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
I saw this and went to the "that" — which led me to make the following discovery:
Why do the following 19:23, 7 November 2021 + 23:41, 7 November 2021 comments not appear in the WP:RS/N history:
I didn't think it would be long until the culture warriors targeted PinkNews, and I don't think it should be too long until they are politely told that it won't be happening, either. Black Kite (talk) 19:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)"
Thank you for your concern, but I don't believe that labelling editors who come to Wikipedia to edit with a certain POV on a subset of articles (whether that be cultural, political, religious or anything else) to be derogatory, merely factual. Black Kite (talk) 23:41, 7 November 2021 (UTC)"
Who hid the
comments by Black Kite from the Revision history — and why?
What's going on here, because this smells to high heaven. Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 14:44, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
Is it possible that you have changed your timezone" – just checked my prefs. It's set on wiki default. Argh! Pyxis Solitary (yak). L not Q. 15:33, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
If you thought we were being bad in the Maneesh case, the Barecode case is fast approaching the length of a respectable article in its own right! Sideswipe9th ( talk) 02:20, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Io, Saturnalia! | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth ( talk) 14:52, 17 December 2021 (UTC) |
Jinx.
Feel free to change it back to your version if preferred. -- Euryalus ( talk) 05:51, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
I haven't really edited since I threw in the towel. All I've done here this last year is remove some crap from my talk page, restore an image that was butchered by the non-free reduction bot, and correct a couple of glaring errors in articles that I happened to read which annoyed me so much I couldn't leave them. I only really stay logged in because I prefer viewing the site with the personal JS and CSS on my account.
Somebody elsewhere told me I only needed 10 edits to vote in the Arbcom election, which surprised me, so I voted anyway, just for the lulz.
Having been pointed to ANI by a discussion in another place I noticed the oblique reference to me, so I commented. That makes me 90% eligible to waste a vote in the next pointless election already, I guess...
What I'm really saying, I suppose, is don't expect a return any time at all, but don't think we evil monitors of wiki-nonsense aren't always lurking, ready to pounce with our ineffectual drivel.
Stay safe. Nice to hear from you. Begoon 14:33, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Holiday cheer | |
Here is a snowman a gift a boar's head and something blue for your listening pleasure. Enjoy and have a wonderful 2022 El C. MarnetteD| Talk 02:55, 19 December 2021 (UTC) |
Hello. I am working on UTRS appeal #52253. This user wishes to have their community ban reviewed by the community. It has been about a year and they claim to have not attempted to circumvent the ban in that time.
I have my doubts that their attitude is one that will convince the community to reverse the ban, they still seem to be blaming the admin who proposed the ban.
Regardless I would like to let them make an appeal on-wiki to see what the community feels. Since you removed talk page access I would like to get your opinion first.
I would of course give them advice prior to doing so. Looking forward to your response. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 03:32, 19 December 2021 (UTC)