This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 |
Discuss it on the talk page? With WHO? That kiddo? Дейноніх ( talk) 21:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).
|
|
Ad Orientem,
NickCT apparently thinks
your admonition to them at AN/I was a joke since he doubled-down on it with another snarky comment as soon as he saw it (Geez..... I try to tell someone they're good at something and this is what I get.
).
[1] Can you please do something about this?
Stoarm (
talk) 17:46, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
I just noticed, three days after the fact, that NickCT made a highly inappropriate edit to the Scott Adams RfC. Amazingly, in the ninth day of the discussion (April 6), he actually changed the RfC statement to add two new options labeled ALT1 and ALT2 (based on alternatives suggested by other editors in the discussion). Other than a legitimately minor fix, the core of an RfC statement obviously cannot be changed once it's begun, other than to remove anything that clearly jeopardizes the RfC's neutrality or otherwise violates its fairness, such as this bold edit by Rhododendrites about an hour earlier. But in this case, NickCT took it upon himself to change the statement options than were presented at the start. As a result, any new readers or participants in the discussion after this change will see a different RfC statement and options than were there originally. These alternatives presented in the discussion, as good as they may be, simply should have been left for the closer to review and evaluate. As Rhododendrites alluded to in their bold edit, the original statement was already problematic because of the confusing "fake !vote" examples that NickCT included, but now we have the equivalent of an election ballot on which the names of new candidates were added long after voting already began. Now what? Stoarm ( talk) 01:57, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
I count 7 for the alternative wording, 5 for Option A, and 0 for Band therefore determined that one option should be eliminated, I replied by saying
Well, we don't simply count "!votes". Per WP:CONSENSUS, consensus is determined by the quality of arguments (not by a simple counted majority), polls should be regarded as structured discussions rather than voting. Responses indicating individual explanations of positions using Wikipedia policies and guidelines are given the highest weight.Per WP:!VOTE,
the communal norm that it is "not the vote" that matters, but the reasoning behind the !vote that is important. While we do often seem to "vote" on things, the conclusion is almost never reached by simply counting votes, as the strength of argument is also very important. A "vote" that doesn't seem to be based on a reasonable rationale may be completely ignored or receive little consideration.Stoarm ( talk) 02:55, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Would you block again please. The banned editor is back. -- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 18:58, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi, would you be able to attend this SPI? It's part of a disruptive range you blocked recently. 137.97.90.197 ( talk) 10:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Amen. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 17:28, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
The IP whom I had sent to ANI earlier (163) and whom you asked to calm down has just
wrote a 10000-character wall of text at ANI about my years of editing history and how it apparently show that I have CIR issues. Although they had apologized for their rudeness over at with respect to the April Fools RfC, I still hope that you can talk to the IP again. Thanks.
NotReallySoroka (
talk) 08:47, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Could you unblock this page? I want to add a detail or if you can't can you write "Rothbart's goal is to marry Odette so he can rule William's kingdom legally, but Odette refuses."? Animelover96 ( talk) 14:26, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello. I had opened a request at ANI three days ago. Despite my request to three different admins ( User talk:DanCherek#Request to have a look at my ANI, User talk:Spicy#Request to have a look at my ANI, User talk:Liz#Request to have a look at my ANI) and support from three different users on the matter at the ANI thread, no admin has intervened at the ANI and the ANI has been archived today.
What can I do now? Was my request senseless? Should I re-post this ANI? Veverve ( talk) 06:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Could you please nominate this page Paul (given name) for DYK. I have spend countless time expanding this. I also don't know how to use DYK. Davidgoodheart ( talk) 20:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Banned editor ( #72.214.16.109, above) is back on new IP, see Special:Contributions/166.194.143.43. Block again? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 22:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Is there some hold up on this? This RfC is pretty obviously in the "apparent that consensus won't be reached" category. Frankly, that was pretty clear when you made this comment and I can't see that anything has been gained through delay. I appreciate that you're busy with adminly activities, but I really wish you'd simply said you didn't have time so I could have requested close from someone else. By sitting on this, you've effectively maintained wording which, according to the vast majority of RfC respondents, isn't right. Acknowledging WP:NOTNEWS, I think you can appreciate the importance of moving faster on articles that are in the news. Inability to effect timely change on this kind of thing makes the project look incompetent.
Are you willing to look into this now, or should I look for closers elsewhere? Let me know if a count of the WP:NOTVOTEs would be helpful. NickCT ( talk) 18:47, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
I created THIS PAGE to organize my upload gallery long time ago, but now it has no use. this is a duplicated page. can you please delete it?
Please help me to delete it. Risantana ( talk) 05:50, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
There was a recent discussion. Although, the account I am referring to is [2], beside, see barnstar during edit war, mobile keyboard emoji [3] [4]. These ( [5] [6]) "disagreements" pretty much looks staged to me, happens in minutes and both easily agree on each other's point. 137.97.121.213 ( talk) 17:49, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
I do not know what to do with Ronald Gerard Mith. They almost never answer at their talk pages, but numerous IPs do. I have warned the user not to use multiple accounts, and I have warned the latest IP commenting their talk page. To no avail. I do not know what to do. Veverve ( talk) 18:40, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
CVU Anti-Vandalism Award | ||
Thanks for your tireless efforts against fighting vandalism! 𝑭𝒊𝒍𝒎𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 ( talk) 16:07, 2 May 2023 (UTC) |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).
|
|
Please see my talk page. Thanks. Yesterday, all my dreams... ( talk) 11:27, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
That's a cool coincidence/timing. Merci! ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 20:25, 9 May 2023 (UTC) |
Hi. I've read your description so please don't worry if you haven't the time or space to deal with this. You helped a while ago with an LTA via an IP block. Said editor is a prolific sock who abuses multiple accounts (very easily more than 20 imo). Anyway, there is an SPI here and the admin involved has asked for someone more familiar to assist. I'm happy to help. Thanks. NEDOCHAN ( talk) 19:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
All of the stuff submitted by that IP on Tejashwi Yadav's page was defamatory and threatening. Kindly delete all revisions of the IP from that page. DreamRimmer ( talk) 03:14, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello. I need at least some advice, and very likely an intervention to explain two users how Wikipedia works.
I am at my wits' end with two other users (User:Arkenstrone, and User:Yesterday, all my dreams....). See Talk:Maria Valtorta#Recent heavy POV-pushing and Talk:The Poem of the Man-God#Criticism is Weak. Their profile, from what you can see in those two threads, is as follow:
None have edited the article very recently, but they are planning to do so in the very near future.
Full disclosure: I have an ANI opened against Arkenstrone (which, as always for my ANI requests, have not received the attention of an admin willing to close the case in a few days; this is not a request for you to intervene at this ANI though). Veverve ( talk) 21:19, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi, this user /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/2A02:C7C:5139:6B00:FCC5:8933:744:59D5/64 is back under a different range /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/2A02:C7C:5127:BE00:AD0B:E78A:82DA:D9AF/64 , would it be possible to block it too? FMSky ( talk) 17:14, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 56, March – April 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:03, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to raise a procedural objection to the decision process for Tina Turner's death on ITN. The discussion was closed in literally one hour, giving many people in a good chunk of the world extremely little opportunity to voice their opinion (support, oppose, or concerns). Consensus could have easily changed in the span of 24 hours, I'm not convinced that enough time was given for others in different regions to give their opinion. This approval was far too quick, this doesn't seem to be a good way to run this discussion. Please let me know if this is a good place to discuss or not, the ITN voting page says "Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page" but I'm not sure where that is. Thanks, QueensanditsCrazy ( talk) 12:08, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello Ad Orientem.
This user "SurferSquall" was recently unblocked and is continuing an edit war, now on the List of equipment of the Indonesian Air Force article. Could you look into this? Thank you. 🛧 Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう!) 02:20, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I'm requesting you do something about the edit history mess of this article. One user keeps claiming a "consensus" was reached on the talk page, when none ever was. (I don't believe he knows that that word means). thanks SurferSquall ( talk) 18:51, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).
|
|
Hi Ad Orientem,
I see you've had dealings with the "Best known for IP" previously. I think I may be dealing with another of his IPs, but I'm not 100 per cent sure. The IP is 142.105.134.196 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and his previous suspicious edits include this, this and this (all removing the 'best known for' phrase). This IP has also personalised the matter quite early on (this was after one revert), which suggests they have interacted with me previously, and the talk page thread suggests a rather combative approach which I really don't want to have to bother with so early on a Tuesday morning. Any advice would be welcome. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 07:58, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
I had reverted the user and posted a note at WP:AN here, as I was suspicious. Their contacting you directly confirms this wasn't their first rodeo. Is there a better noticeboard than WP:AN that I can use in the future for this sort of thing, or would that have been sufficient in time? Thanks. BilCat ( talk) 23:47, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
I don't mean to gripe, and I haven't been updating for the glory of it, but in crediting the updaters of the boat sinking in Greece, you seem to missed several key editors (I am but one), while crediting other with less engagement. Perhaps there is some sort of nature of the beast thing at ITN that I am simply not well enough acquainted enough with as a process, but at the time of the posting I was rather too busy updating the actual page at the time, and I am rather cautious when it comes to hijacking other people's nominations simply to credit myself. Iskandar323 ( talk) 07:21, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Hey there. Just wanted to say that I really like User:Ad Orientem#Some_Thoughts_on_AfD. Those look like some really pratical tips for AFD closers. If you know of any other resources like that (that give advice to AFD closers), I'm all ears. Happy editing. – Novem Linguae ( talk) 21:02, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to 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/AlisonW. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 30, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 23:59, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi.. regarding ANI case that I submit about SurferSquall and since now the case is already archived. Also since you were the only responding admin. So the what's the result? Is he placed under '1RR editing restriction'? Ckfasdf ( talk) 23:11, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).
Maybe a more generally understood phrase would make sense here? I like the list, though you say nothing on the sphere of bigotry (I know one otherwise respectable admin who has a serious blind spot to that in themselves that IMO affects their admin role, but your list would not penalize them.) — Quondum 13:08, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Pinging you as a recently active admin. As a continuation of User talk:331dot#Tendentious editing and non-communication, the user is back and making the same changes as before, and not does not know to communicate. Jay 💬 04:55, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for protecting the French Army article. This prolific SP has developed a fixation on me and has been harassing me for a while. If you don't mind me asking, is there a reason why the personal attacks by Reidinfors haven't been rev-deleted? Thanks. M.Bitton ( talk) 23:24, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
Thanks for dealing with vandalism and helping out at AIV a lot! Appreciate it! — Prodraxis { talk • contributions} (she/her) 22:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC) |
The proposed decision for the AlisonW case has been posted. Statements regarding the proposed decision are welcome at the talk page. Please note that comments must be made in your own section. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 15:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your help at Lloyd Bentsen but I thought I would ask: given all the persistent vandalism history on the page going back more than three years and given the protection history of the page (see the page's protection history) why you didn't just go indefinite semi-protection? Money Slot ( talk) 23:34, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Greetings. These two are socking at Jimbo and the Jet-Set, inserting credits where none existed:
Wasn't sure if you're doing rangeblocks, so I thought I'd let you know as you did the blocking. Mac Dreamstate ( talk) 20:38, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi AO. A user you blocked a few years ago, PeopleEater143, is back editing pop music articles with the same nasty attitude in edit summaries on 2601:48:8100:5A60:D590:DD6C:3FD7:4E0. Ss 112 00:27, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
That's WMF-banned Angela Criss. Basically block without TPA access and ask for a global lock. LilianaUwU ( talk / contributions) 02:09, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
Matchmakerforjps ( talk · contribs) Knitsey ( talk) 17:07, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
The arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW has been closed, and the final decision is viewable at the case page. The following remedy has been enacted:
For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 17:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
I have been unblocked on the English Wiki but I'm still banned indefinitely from the Spanish Language by Librarian Ruy under request from David C. S.
Can you help unblocking me in there too?
In a brief synopsis, the case is as follows, as can be seen on the Page History:
1. On June 20 23:13 TBKR Chicago 101 inserted the first Pool, Comunicaliza, with the Oficial Candidates, nevertheless it was grossly inacurate , I deleted then and inserted the corrected percentages rates : Topić [2.6% from the stated 10.3%],Yaku [10.3% from the stated 11.2%], Otto [11.2% from 6.2%],Hervas [6.2% from 2.6%]. I ,also, ordered the columns according to percentages rates.
2.On June 23 17:52 TDKR Chicago 101 inserted the first "Data Encuesta Poll". The Reference given, the Facebook's Diario Opinión page states the research was made between June 5-9 . On June 25 12:19 I deleted it writting a note explaining that the Poll was, obviously, fraudulent: it named Luisa González as Candidate , but she was proclaimed on June 10 and no one could know it beforehand. Shortly after, he reinserted this Poll that had been proven false.
3.Davis C. S. then, introduced a trird data pool dated July 3 were the percentages of each candidate and the number of participants were blatantly fabricated. He gaves, as reference, a Facebook page, the Pollster does have other name, but the Poll is actually the same one that already had been published on June 22, he just invented the preposterous percentages out of his mind.
4.At 7/14 9:48 Number 57 deleted the Poll but, shortly afterwards, David C. S. reinserted it, giving another reference: a Facebook page of 'La Posta" , a Blank page with a broken video of just 1 second
David C.S. have been doing many others acts of vandalism and waging a Ediction War , deleting all my edictions viciously.
Dirceu Mag Dirceu Mag ( talk) 16:57, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
For not replying to your query at Dirceu Mag's talk page. I somehow just missed replying to it. Hope you don't take it otherwise. Warmly, Lourdes 03:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 ( talk) 06:33, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 |
Discuss it on the talk page? With WHO? That kiddo? Дейноніх ( talk) 21:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).
|
|
Ad Orientem,
NickCT apparently thinks
your admonition to them at AN/I was a joke since he doubled-down on it with another snarky comment as soon as he saw it (Geez..... I try to tell someone they're good at something and this is what I get.
).
[1] Can you please do something about this?
Stoarm (
talk) 17:46, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
I just noticed, three days after the fact, that NickCT made a highly inappropriate edit to the Scott Adams RfC. Amazingly, in the ninth day of the discussion (April 6), he actually changed the RfC statement to add two new options labeled ALT1 and ALT2 (based on alternatives suggested by other editors in the discussion). Other than a legitimately minor fix, the core of an RfC statement obviously cannot be changed once it's begun, other than to remove anything that clearly jeopardizes the RfC's neutrality or otherwise violates its fairness, such as this bold edit by Rhododendrites about an hour earlier. But in this case, NickCT took it upon himself to change the statement options than were presented at the start. As a result, any new readers or participants in the discussion after this change will see a different RfC statement and options than were there originally. These alternatives presented in the discussion, as good as they may be, simply should have been left for the closer to review and evaluate. As Rhododendrites alluded to in their bold edit, the original statement was already problematic because of the confusing "fake !vote" examples that NickCT included, but now we have the equivalent of an election ballot on which the names of new candidates were added long after voting already began. Now what? Stoarm ( talk) 01:57, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
I count 7 for the alternative wording, 5 for Option A, and 0 for Band therefore determined that one option should be eliminated, I replied by saying
Well, we don't simply count "!votes". Per WP:CONSENSUS, consensus is determined by the quality of arguments (not by a simple counted majority), polls should be regarded as structured discussions rather than voting. Responses indicating individual explanations of positions using Wikipedia policies and guidelines are given the highest weight.Per WP:!VOTE,
the communal norm that it is "not the vote" that matters, but the reasoning behind the !vote that is important. While we do often seem to "vote" on things, the conclusion is almost never reached by simply counting votes, as the strength of argument is also very important. A "vote" that doesn't seem to be based on a reasonable rationale may be completely ignored or receive little consideration.Stoarm ( talk) 02:55, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Would you block again please. The banned editor is back. -- 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 18:58, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi, would you be able to attend this SPI? It's part of a disruptive range you blocked recently. 137.97.90.197 ( talk) 10:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Amen. -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 17:28, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
The IP whom I had sent to ANI earlier (163) and whom you asked to calm down has just
wrote a 10000-character wall of text at ANI about my years of editing history and how it apparently show that I have CIR issues. Although they had apologized for their rudeness over at with respect to the April Fools RfC, I still hope that you can talk to the IP again. Thanks.
NotReallySoroka (
talk) 08:47, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Could you unblock this page? I want to add a detail or if you can't can you write "Rothbart's goal is to marry Odette so he can rule William's kingdom legally, but Odette refuses."? Animelover96 ( talk) 14:26, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello. I had opened a request at ANI three days ago. Despite my request to three different admins ( User talk:DanCherek#Request to have a look at my ANI, User talk:Spicy#Request to have a look at my ANI, User talk:Liz#Request to have a look at my ANI) and support from three different users on the matter at the ANI thread, no admin has intervened at the ANI and the ANI has been archived today.
What can I do now? Was my request senseless? Should I re-post this ANI? Veverve ( talk) 06:32, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Could you please nominate this page Paul (given name) for DYK. I have spend countless time expanding this. I also don't know how to use DYK. Davidgoodheart ( talk) 20:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Banned editor ( #72.214.16.109, above) is back on new IP, see Special:Contributions/166.194.143.43. Block again? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 ( talk) 22:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Is there some hold up on this? This RfC is pretty obviously in the "apparent that consensus won't be reached" category. Frankly, that was pretty clear when you made this comment and I can't see that anything has been gained through delay. I appreciate that you're busy with adminly activities, but I really wish you'd simply said you didn't have time so I could have requested close from someone else. By sitting on this, you've effectively maintained wording which, according to the vast majority of RfC respondents, isn't right. Acknowledging WP:NOTNEWS, I think you can appreciate the importance of moving faster on articles that are in the news. Inability to effect timely change on this kind of thing makes the project look incompetent.
Are you willing to look into this now, or should I look for closers elsewhere? Let me know if a count of the WP:NOTVOTEs would be helpful. NickCT ( talk) 18:47, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
I created THIS PAGE to organize my upload gallery long time ago, but now it has no use. this is a duplicated page. can you please delete it?
Please help me to delete it. Risantana ( talk) 05:50, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
There was a recent discussion. Although, the account I am referring to is [2], beside, see barnstar during edit war, mobile keyboard emoji [3] [4]. These ( [5] [6]) "disagreements" pretty much looks staged to me, happens in minutes and both easily agree on each other's point. 137.97.121.213 ( talk) 17:49, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
I do not know what to do with Ronald Gerard Mith. They almost never answer at their talk pages, but numerous IPs do. I have warned the user not to use multiple accounts, and I have warned the latest IP commenting their talk page. To no avail. I do not know what to do. Veverve ( talk) 18:40, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
CVU Anti-Vandalism Award | ||
Thanks for your tireless efforts against fighting vandalism! 𝑭𝒊𝒍𝒎𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 ( talk) 16:07, 2 May 2023 (UTC) |
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).
|
|
Please see my talk page. Thanks. Yesterday, all my dreams... ( talk) 11:27, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
That's a cool coincidence/timing. Merci! ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 20:25, 9 May 2023 (UTC) |
Hi. I've read your description so please don't worry if you haven't the time or space to deal with this. You helped a while ago with an LTA via an IP block. Said editor is a prolific sock who abuses multiple accounts (very easily more than 20 imo). Anyway, there is an SPI here and the admin involved has asked for someone more familiar to assist. I'm happy to help. Thanks. NEDOCHAN ( talk) 19:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
All of the stuff submitted by that IP on Tejashwi Yadav's page was defamatory and threatening. Kindly delete all revisions of the IP from that page. DreamRimmer ( talk) 03:14, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello. I need at least some advice, and very likely an intervention to explain two users how Wikipedia works.
I am at my wits' end with two other users (User:Arkenstrone, and User:Yesterday, all my dreams....). See Talk:Maria Valtorta#Recent heavy POV-pushing and Talk:The Poem of the Man-God#Criticism is Weak. Their profile, from what you can see in those two threads, is as follow:
None have edited the article very recently, but they are planning to do so in the very near future.
Full disclosure: I have an ANI opened against Arkenstrone (which, as always for my ANI requests, have not received the attention of an admin willing to close the case in a few days; this is not a request for you to intervene at this ANI though). Veverve ( talk) 21:19, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi, this user /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/2A02:C7C:5139:6B00:FCC5:8933:744:59D5/64 is back under a different range /info/en/?search=Special:Contributions/2A02:C7C:5127:BE00:AD0B:E78A:82DA:D9AF/64 , would it be possible to block it too? FMSky ( talk) 17:14, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 56, March – April 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:03, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to raise a procedural objection to the decision process for Tina Turner's death on ITN. The discussion was closed in literally one hour, giving many people in a good chunk of the world extremely little opportunity to voice their opinion (support, oppose, or concerns). Consensus could have easily changed in the span of 24 hours, I'm not convinced that enough time was given for others in different regions to give their opinion. This approval was far too quick, this doesn't seem to be a good way to run this discussion. Please let me know if this is a good place to discuss or not, the ITN voting page says "Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page" but I'm not sure where that is. Thanks, QueensanditsCrazy ( talk) 12:08, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Hello Ad Orientem.
This user "SurferSquall" was recently unblocked and is continuing an edit war, now on the List of equipment of the Indonesian Air Force article. Could you look into this? Thank you. 🛧 Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう!) 02:20, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I'm requesting you do something about the edit history mess of this article. One user keeps claiming a "consensus" was reached on the talk page, when none ever was. (I don't believe he knows that that word means). thanks SurferSquall ( talk) 18:51, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).
|
|
Hi Ad Orientem,
I see you've had dealings with the "Best known for IP" previously. I think I may be dealing with another of his IPs, but I'm not 100 per cent sure. The IP is 142.105.134.196 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and his previous suspicious edits include this, this and this (all removing the 'best known for' phrase). This IP has also personalised the matter quite early on (this was after one revert), which suggests they have interacted with me previously, and the talk page thread suggests a rather combative approach which I really don't want to have to bother with so early on a Tuesday morning. Any advice would be welcome. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 07:58, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
I had reverted the user and posted a note at WP:AN here, as I was suspicious. Their contacting you directly confirms this wasn't their first rodeo. Is there a better noticeboard than WP:AN that I can use in the future for this sort of thing, or would that have been sufficient in time? Thanks. BilCat ( talk) 23:47, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
I don't mean to gripe, and I haven't been updating for the glory of it, but in crediting the updaters of the boat sinking in Greece, you seem to missed several key editors (I am but one), while crediting other with less engagement. Perhaps there is some sort of nature of the beast thing at ITN that I am simply not well enough acquainted enough with as a process, but at the time of the posting I was rather too busy updating the actual page at the time, and I am rather cautious when it comes to hijacking other people's nominations simply to credit myself. Iskandar323 ( talk) 07:21, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Hey there. Just wanted to say that I really like User:Ad Orientem#Some_Thoughts_on_AfD. Those look like some really pratical tips for AFD closers. If you know of any other resources like that (that give advice to AFD closers), I'm all ears. Happy editing. – Novem Linguae ( talk) 21:02, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
You were recently listed as a party to 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/AlisonW. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW/Evidence. Please add your evidence by June 30, 2023, which is when the evidence phase closes. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 23:59, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Hi.. regarding ANI case that I submit about SurferSquall and since now the case is already archived. Also since you were the only responding admin. So the what's the result? Is he placed under '1RR editing restriction'? Ckfasdf ( talk) 23:11, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2023).
Maybe a more generally understood phrase would make sense here? I like the list, though you say nothing on the sphere of bigotry (I know one otherwise respectable admin who has a serious blind spot to that in themselves that IMO affects their admin role, but your list would not penalize them.) — Quondum 13:08, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Pinging you as a recently active admin. As a continuation of User talk:331dot#Tendentious editing and non-communication, the user is back and making the same changes as before, and not does not know to communicate. Jay 💬 04:55, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for protecting the French Army article. This prolific SP has developed a fixation on me and has been harassing me for a while. If you don't mind me asking, is there a reason why the personal attacks by Reidinfors haven't been rev-deleted? Thanks. M.Bitton ( talk) 23:24, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
Thanks for dealing with vandalism and helping out at AIV a lot! Appreciate it! — Prodraxis { talk • contributions} (she/her) 22:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC) |
The proposed decision for the AlisonW case has been posted. Statements regarding the proposed decision are welcome at the talk page. Please note that comments must be made in your own section. For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 15:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your help at Lloyd Bentsen but I thought I would ask: given all the persistent vandalism history on the page going back more than three years and given the protection history of the page (see the page's protection history) why you didn't just go indefinite semi-protection? Money Slot ( talk) 23:34, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
Greetings. These two are socking at Jimbo and the Jet-Set, inserting credits where none existed:
Wasn't sure if you're doing rangeblocks, so I thought I'd let you know as you did the blocking. Mac Dreamstate ( talk) 20:38, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi AO. A user you blocked a few years ago, PeopleEater143, is back editing pop music articles with the same nasty attitude in edit summaries on 2601:48:8100:5A60:D590:DD6C:3FD7:4E0. Ss 112 00:27, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
That's WMF-banned Angela Criss. Basically block without TPA access and ask for a global lock. LilianaUwU ( talk / contributions) 02:09, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
Matchmakerforjps ( talk · contribs) Knitsey ( talk) 17:07, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
The arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/AlisonW has been closed, and the final decision is viewable at the case page. The following remedy has been enacted:
For the Arbitration Committee, Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 17:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
I have been unblocked on the English Wiki but I'm still banned indefinitely from the Spanish Language by Librarian Ruy under request from David C. S.
Can you help unblocking me in there too?
In a brief synopsis, the case is as follows, as can be seen on the Page History:
1. On June 20 23:13 TBKR Chicago 101 inserted the first Pool, Comunicaliza, with the Oficial Candidates, nevertheless it was grossly inacurate , I deleted then and inserted the corrected percentages rates : Topić [2.6% from the stated 10.3%],Yaku [10.3% from the stated 11.2%], Otto [11.2% from 6.2%],Hervas [6.2% from 2.6%]. I ,also, ordered the columns according to percentages rates.
2.On June 23 17:52 TDKR Chicago 101 inserted the first "Data Encuesta Poll". The Reference given, the Facebook's Diario Opinión page states the research was made between June 5-9 . On June 25 12:19 I deleted it writting a note explaining that the Poll was, obviously, fraudulent: it named Luisa González as Candidate , but she was proclaimed on June 10 and no one could know it beforehand. Shortly after, he reinserted this Poll that had been proven false.
3.Davis C. S. then, introduced a trird data pool dated July 3 were the percentages of each candidate and the number of participants were blatantly fabricated. He gaves, as reference, a Facebook page, the Pollster does have other name, but the Poll is actually the same one that already had been published on June 22, he just invented the preposterous percentages out of his mind.
4.At 7/14 9:48 Number 57 deleted the Poll but, shortly afterwards, David C. S. reinserted it, giving another reference: a Facebook page of 'La Posta" , a Blank page with a broken video of just 1 second
David C.S. have been doing many others acts of vandalism and waging a Ediction War , deleting all my edictions viciously.
Dirceu Mag Dirceu Mag ( talk) 16:57, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 57, May – June 2023
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:22, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
For not replying to your query at Dirceu Mag's talk page. I somehow just missed replying to it. Hope you don't take it otherwise. Warmly, Lourdes 03:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
There is a new requested move discussion in progress for the Charles III article. Since you participated in the previous discussion, I thought you might like to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 ( talk) 06:33, 24 July 2023 (UTC)