Jump to content

User talk:Drmies/Archive 144

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 140←Archive 142Archive 143Archive 144Archive 145Archive 146→Archive 150

Your block of 71.28.170.75

Duck?   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 16:37, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Celestica

Hey, are Actual123 and/or Lhelfer related to Createitnow114?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Mail notification

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Ppt91talk 20:03, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Oneonta High School (Alabama)

I'd be happy to have some help getting this entry to mainspace. Details on the school colors and mascots would be great.

Also:

FloridaArmy (talk) 23:06, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

  • I'll be happy to help, and these are important topics, but last time we worked on the same thing I think you called me a racist. And I hope you're not in a hurry, since I have a little Black History Month project of my own. Drmies (talk) 00:32, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
  • FloridaArmy, I see what some of the reviewers said and I understand the problem with those topics. I've had the same problems. This website is useful--it gives newspaper articles, not the kind of comprehensive book coverage we'd like to see, but it adds up. Drmies (talk) 01:20, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Spinningspark leaves us

Per this, User:Spinningspark has left us, the project and the world. He was still editing right up until a few days before his passing on 17 February. Thought you'd like to know, remembering working with him during the multi-year Bacon Challenges of yore, when we were younger and people were posting images of Maatjesharing eating on your Talk page. Geoff | Who, me? 14:13, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

  • Oh no. Yes, we are growing old here, aren't we--but at least sometimes we grow old together. Thank you so much for letting me know. Spinningspark was a wonderful editor, and likely a fine human being. Drmies (talk) 15:41, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi @Drmies! Just a note to say thank you and that I replied last night, in case it got lost along the way. And, in any case, much appreciate your taking the time to help. Ppt91talk 17:36, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Your block

Hi there, regarding this block. An ever-changing IP from the Dallas area has been trying to add information for years, both to John C. Hull (politician) and Boston. Usually the same edit. As I recall, they once identified themself as a descendant of Hull. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:03, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Ah...yes...Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Colemanhull/Archive. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:46, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Drmies. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 16:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 16:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

  • Got it, thanks--I punted it to ArbCom to see if they have any thoughts. It really is kind of a thought experiment--but then again, I don't want the editor to be able to claim a victory when they cheated. Drmies (talk) 17:03, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Lynching of Allen Brooks

No words... If you have the time, can you have a read-through for errors which I have no doubt made. I need to take a mental break, but still have some expansion work to do later (book sources to incorporate). Eddie891 Talk Work 22:22, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

February songs

February songs
my daily stories

Late happy new year - I was away for most of January. Now I write my own stories, today about a Ukrainian actress born OTD and a cantata that was performed 300 years ago (three days ago). -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:40, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

... and today a book, Alte Liebe, for Valentine --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

... and today the regional festival - DYK of 13 years ago ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:59, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

My story on 24 February is about Artemy Vedel (TFA by Amitchell235), and I made a suggestion for more peace, - what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:05, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

today: two women whose birthday we celebrate today, 99 and 90! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:24, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

  • The 2023 appointees for the Ombuds commission are AGK, Ameisenigel, Bennylin, Daniuu, Emufarmers, Faendalimas, JJMC89, MdsShakil, Minorax and Renvoy as regular members and Zabe as advisory members.
  • Following the 2023 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Mykola7, Superpes15, and Xaosflux.
  • The Terms of Use update cycle has started, which includes a [p]roposal for better addressing undisclosed paid editing. Feedback is being accepted until 24 April 2023.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:18, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

I logged off and found myself under an IP that is blocked by you….

I don’t know the technical how and why of how the IP editor thing works. But when logging out one time I found myself under an IP who was blocked by you…just feel like telling too out of caution that was not me. The IP number is xxx. Thank you! Jhenderson 777 16:13, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Ok sure thing. The guy who used the IP number before seemed to be a local vandal. But no I am not. I Didn’t know the reveal of IP number had security issues concerns. So thanks I guess. Jhenderson 777 00:31, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

WP:SPI comment

Hi Drmies, see the comments that I have added at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Prince Of Roblox. AP 499D25 (talk) 10:13, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

FWIW

I probably would not have remove that OK content. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:30, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

ta

ta (dank u) JarrahTree 02:49, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

IP issue at John Hull (merchant)

I've been trying to clean up the article John Hull (merchant) for the past few days. The article has long-standing issues with inappropriate sourcing, a reliance on primary sources and OR interpretations, and factual innaccuraries. Last night, a roving IP popped up that started reverting my edits. I've tried to engage with them on their talk pages here and here, but they have just continued to revert me. I then tried adding inline notes on problematic claims, but they reverted me again 1 2 3 and accused me of knowing/being "Richard 666" in a couple of edit summaries.

Looking through the page history, I found that you reverted an IP in 2021 for socking, (possibly because the IPs are the person who formerly edited as User:Theonomad). The IPs seem to have a history with the page; they repeatedly say that the unsourced claims I've removed have stood for over two years. I was wondering if you can provide any context or guidance on what I can do. Thank you! CoatGuy2 (talk) 14:44, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

"Vandalism"

Excuse me? Show me the vandalism, because whatever I did must surely have been an editing error, and I cannot find it anyhow. --Coldtrack (talk) 19:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

PS. Furthermore, I appreciate that you are an administrator, but conventions apply, and you are refrain from any further degrading references to me as "they". I respect other people's choices and will therefore not tolerate any "non-binary until proven one thing" practices when people talk about me. I've declared my sex, and it is precisely where I have also stated I identify as Russian, and I know for a fact that the community is now fishing out obscure and sneaky reasoning to have me slowly but surely banned. I may leave of my own accord before that. --Coldtrack (talk) 19:48, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) Please see WIKT:Singular they We use it a lot on Wikipedia. As to the Vandalism warning, and in the context of the ANI thread, I think it refers to this "blatant troll" edit summary. I don't think it's sneaky. I think you are showing you are not compatible with this project, and that's just reading your remark here and ANI. Best. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:53, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
No. I've been here since 2016 but only recently - for my own reasons in real life - I have shown myself to be a Russian from Ukraine, and one who is not on the side of the project's masses. My record is clean and I have never been disruptive. This couldn't be more sneaky. I've made it clear that I am a male and should not be called "they". I have refrained from debating the subject, and saw with my own eyes what happened to User:Edin balgarin who was also unblemished until the day he offended the wrong people. I keep my distance from those topics, but draw the line when someone tries to suck me into their worldview. --Coldtrack (talk) 19:58, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
One more thing. "Blatant troll" is at most a personal attack, not vandalism. I was scouring the page to see if I'd accidentally hit the odd "s" before a word to make it look stupid. Trolling is a real thing, and either I am right or wrong. If I'm wrong, I've pledged not to do it again. Can't see now what else is expected of me other than to pretend to switch political course. --Coldtrack (talk) 20:01, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
And yet your edit summaries are unacceptable. Food for thought. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:01, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, and that is what is not acceptable. All those personal attacks. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:03, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Refer to the above post. --Coldtrack (talk) 20:02, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Well, Coldtrack, excuse me for using the wrong "only warning"; I should have picked "harassment", I guess. Oh, I really don't care who you are or what you declared, and it has nothing to do with what I warned you about. Now that you told me you wish to be identified with a masculine pronoun, I'll do that--big deal. I don't know where you've made that clear--pardon me for not sifting through your edits or your user page to try and figure that out. If you think the use of singular they is degrading, you have a lot to learn about English-speaking communities in 2023.
Here's the thing: if someone is trolling, you report them for trolling, at ANI or someplace else. You do not go around calling them that, and esp. not in edit summaries. It's rude and it's uncollaborative. You said you won't do it anymore--great. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 22:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
That's fine then. I am well aware of English speaking conventions in 2023 but we don't need to explore that further now this is cleared up. Everything came at me all at once and all of a sudden I have having to get over the shock that after seven years I find myself viewed as a villain. Not saying my conduct was totally acceptable. Of course it wasn't. I won't be calling anyone a troll again regardless if that person appears to be the most obvious type. I've got my own privileges to consider if they become compromised. Thanks. --Coldtrack (talk) 22:36, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Please see my talk. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:26, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
PS If it mattered to me, I would put my pronouns in my sig. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:27, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Singular they has been in use since Chaucer and its use is about 4 centuries older than objections to it. Women taking on traditionally 'male' roles and 'gender identity' (and internet anonymity) matters may have extended the range of reasons for using it, but it's "as old as Methuselah" - whoever they are! Pincrete (talk) 11:51, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Emilio Ferro

Greetings. Saw you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emilio Ferro as a sockfarm. Just recreated by another new editor. Thought you might look at it, since I'm not sure what other socks are involved. Onel5969 TT me 11:41, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Assistance requested once more

I need help in regards to List of The Boys characters. User:Michel Laurin wants to add how the TV series version of the Deep is biologically inaccurate. They have good sourcing, but I've undone their edits twice on the grounds that it doesn't belong in the main character page because it has nothing to do with the Deep and that it should go into a dedicated character page for him if he ever gets one. However, Michel has consistently counter-undone my edits three times and I fear that they are willing to start an edit war over this. I'm not sure on how to proceed, so I could use some help in resolving this situation as soon as possible please. I have already asked User:Materialscientist, but I thought it best to ask another admin just in case. Blazewing16 (talk) 12:48, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dj1508

Although the username does not follow the pattern, about half of MorningDawning's 101 edits intersect with the master, and they are using the same platform. What do you think?--Bbb23 (talk) 15:00, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Wholesale deletions

Drmies, I noted your edits to Save the Children were made in the spirit of conciseness and I agree that there was extensive fluff in the major section deleted and in the remainder of the article. Still, I would encourage you to direct your deletion efforts more surgically. In this case you had nuked BBC references which is at odds with your edit summary about lacking secondary sources. Thank you! Keitsist (talk) 18:05, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

  • You're welcome to save what can be saved. You can probably pull out a sentence or two, maybe a quote: "The charity Save the Children has launched a report, No Child Born to Die, which highlights the potential funding shortfall for global immunisation". The other BBC article doesn't actually mention the organization. Drmies (talk) 22:40, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Bilateral relations

It looks like the bilateral relations troll has been very busy (see 151.135.87.132/16 and 5.46.247.39). M.Bitton (talk) 17:28, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Query

Hello, Drmies,

I saw you welcomed Christopheronthemove. I'm surprised that an account that has only been active for 14 hours has jumped into multiple AFD discussions and is referring to WP:NFILM. But if your suspicions aren't raised, maybe I just have "new accounts voting in AFDs" paranoia. I asked them if they had a previous account they edited with but, to be honest, actual sockpuppets don't tend to be forthcoming when I ask that question.

Any way, have a great weekend. Liz Read! Talk! 04:49, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Ugh

Gotta love what's happening on enwiki tonight. And by love, I don't mean love. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 00:31, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Jarrett-bliss

Hello Drmies, re your: here is four minutes and 34 seconds of Jarrett-bliss at [1], and very sorry to butt in as I know you weren't speaking to me there, but just noting that given there was a lot of the "sounds of silence" in that Jarrett piece, I noticed from your quoting of the timecode duration that coincidentally it's just exactly one second longer than John Cage's famous 4'33" of total silence! (Just intended as a good faith and light sharing, FWIW). Walton22 (talk) 04:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

World War II and the history of Jews in Poland: Arbitration case opened

Hello Drmies,

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/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland/Evidence. Please add your evidence by April 04, 2023, which is when the first evidence phase closes. Submitted evidence will be summarized by Arbitrators and Clerks at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland/Evidence/Summary. Owing to the summary style, editors are encouraged to submit evidence in small chunks sooner rather than more complete evidence later.

Details about the summary page, the two phases of evidence, a timeline and other answers to frequently asked questions can be found at the case's FAQ page.

For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration.

For the Arbitration Committee,
~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:11, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 55

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 55, January – February 2023

  • New bundle partners:
    • Newspapers.com
    • Fold3
  • 1Lib1Ref January report
  • Spotlight: EDS SmartText Searching

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --12:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Salmon chaos

I have started a discussion at Talk:Salmon_chaos#Taiwan/name_change_removals about recent edits to the page. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 15:47, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

In this case [2] [3] with the comment [4] A much more verbose talk page message has been removed to help avoiding trout or salmon in anyway. Your thought on the matter gratefully received... JarrahTree 14:13, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Scarsdale, New York

If you have a moment, could you look at the edit history at Scarsdale, New York? Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 15:28, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

  • Ooooh, I'm not sure I'm with you there 100%, sorry. I looked at the talk page too, and saw someone say "it's better to talk about 'best places to live'"--personally I think this wealth stuff is relevant, though I'm not convinced of all the sources. But I'm also not convinced of the skills and knowledge and disinterestedness of your opponent here. I think this is a matter for the talk page, and possibly warrants input from some other editors in that field. Who is that really nice New York editor? Oh, Epicgenius. Drmies (talk) 15:54, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the ping Drmies. Yeah, a discussion probably should be opened on the talk page.
      There may be some merit to including info about wealth, seeing as how locales in Westchester County tend to attract attention because they have so many rich residents. However, I'm not too sure if this extends to info like Scarsdale school district is consistently ranked the 1st wealthiest school district in America. First, the source for that claim is dodgy; even if that source was 100% reliable, it says that Scarsdale's district is tied with two others for the richest in New York. The rest of the section has a couple of Business Insider sources, which are only marginally reliable, as well as a WP:CITEBOMB of Bloomberg sources. I would check that the claims being made in the section aren't being exaggerated, as is the case with the info about the school district.
      Similarly, the ZIP Code may be notable, given that we regularly include ZIP Codes in infoboxes, and since infoboxes are supposed to summarize information that's cited in the text. However, I'm also not sure that we should be making claims like The areas below, while not part of Scarsdale, are also covered by 10583, for a total population coverage of over twice the village itself. There was actually a long discussion about the ZIP Codes on the talk page, but that discussion was almost 20 years ago, so it's worth starting a new discussion about the ZIP Codes. Just my two cents. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:30, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
      • Thanks so much for weighing in! I think I'm with you on that school district thing, esp. given the sourcing. Yes, I don't like Business Insider at all; if I ever use it I feel like I'm clutching at straws for notability. Funding for school districts in itself is a highly encyclopedic thing but requires rigorous sourcing--in my part of America school funding is often done via sales tax, so when 2008 hit our school system fired everybody and rehired some of them after the summer. It's a white flight/taxation issue of course: the rich folk who'd sent their kids to segregation academies didn't want to chip in for the public schools; it's disgusting. Anyway, Magnolia677, I think this leaves your glass half-full, perhaps? Epicgenius, perhaps we can copy your comment to the talk page if that discussion is started. Thanks, to both of you, Drmies (talk) 16:48, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll join the discussion at the talk page. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:56, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

SPI

Hello Drmies, I was wondering if you or someone else could take a look at this sockpuppetry/meatpuppetry case when you have some time? I noticed it has been opened for a while with no response. Thank you in advance. --Griboski (talk) 19:34, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Mnnie053

Pls see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/User:Igsiters < Moxy- 22:31, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

New SP

One day after his last block they returned and is overlapping with this blocked SP https://sigma.toolforge.org/editorinteract.py?users=TheTurtleHistorian&users=Dmhw&users=&startdate=&enddate=&ns=&server=enwiki. they both editing with mobile and changing mostly names and editing Chinese history. It looks like me a sock but I am not sure which master. Shadow4dark (talk) 12:59, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lord Gong has been accepted

Lord Gong, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Drmies (talk) 23:01, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

Anne Amie

I need some advice on how to handle the problems with this article. The article subject has been editing her article since 2019. She received a COI warning back then, but it didn't deter her from adding unsourced, self-serving material. She seemingly edits in spurts, so after a few edits in 2019, she made another bunch of edits in March 2022, and then edited much more in the last few months.

I stumbled across the article recently and gutted it. It has two refs and then a very long list of external links, most of which are interviews and YouTubes, and some of which don't work, and, as I recall, one of which is also one of the two refs. Her image in the infobox appears to be a copyright violation; she says it's her own work (they always do), but it also says that the copyright holder is someone else.

Anyway, the subject has restored everything back to the way it was a couple of times, and my warnings on her Talk page have only served to finally get her to at least say something (rather than just edit her article).

I'm not willing to edit-war with her, although I've thus far only edited the article twice. I also don't want to invest a lot of time in this. These kinds of issues are generally frustrating, and there are so many articles like this on Wikipedia, it's not worth it. You may feel the same way and not want to get involved in it, but sometimes these kinds of things grab you, so I thought I'd try.

I hope you haven't been affected much by the storms in the south.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:53, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Unreferenced material in pageant articles

I thought I'd bring this to your attention. I'm not sure exactly why, but the pageant articles are really hard to keep up to standard. Over the weekend, I made similar cleanouts of unreferenced tables in a few other pageant articles. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:54, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Disregard, now I notice they added a citation at the same time as the revert. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
It's another one of those areas inhabited by fans and a considerable number of socks. Way too many of those articles are full of factoids and flags. It's really no different from wrestling or anime or K-pop or monster trucks, unfortunately--but thanks for trying. Drmies (talk) 17:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Afshin Naghouni

Puff piece is not far off from how I see it. I don’t like it. It’s better after you’ve edited it. I have worked on this daily tweaking it. I just want to get it out of stub and make it a proper biography. what else would you do if you don’t mind. I don’t even really like the headers but it’s already done. I just want to make it better. Anything constructive would be great thanks.Kkenya (talk) 07:50, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

I do see exactly why you did that, especially now that I’ve been comparing it. Unbelievable. You were constructive, glaringly. It’s too dark now maybe in that lead section. After 10 minutes no it’s not too dark. TyKkenya (talk) 08:53, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
not enough until recently. Then I knew something was off. What because it doesn’t describe him now but you Kkenya (talk) 08:53, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Disgaard one of those please. two replies to myself were sent at the same time. Thats a talent I didnt know I had. Kkenya (talk) 09:06, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Kkenya. The first revert was (in part) because of statements like "The colours on the boy's face were a stark contrast to his condition"--that's interpretation and needs to be ascribed explicitly to a source. If the source has that, cite it concisely and/or paraphrase it, and make clear who's speaking. The authority of that description must rely explicitly on the authority of the source. Further on, you wrote (and then removed) "Antix's lyrics paint a picture of Naghouni's bravery and the harsh realities of living within Iran’s Islamic regime"--the same applies to that.
As I noted in my edit summary, citing this HuffPo article is really not OK--it's a long story, but click on Wikipedia:HUFFPO, and then look at the entry "HuffPost contributors": the article you cite is by a contributor (see this link), it's explicitly marked as "blog", and it's from before 2018 (and I don't think it matters that this is the UK HuffPo). So I would not use it to make a point in a WP:BLP. Also, make sure that you don't write something, cite it, and then add something more at the end of the paragraph--it makes it look like it's unsourced. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 14:44, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Honestly, as I’ve gone through every little thing,, I wish someone like you would have been around sooner. I had to really look at this and I did, objectively. I genuinely appreciate what you did. Thanks again. Kkenya (talk) 14:50, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
“The colors on his face were these beautiful purples and pinks which completely contrasted to his condition.” That’s a copy and paste from the source so tell me how that’s an interpretation. Those were the artist’s words. I’m going to have to see exactly what you tell me about this. I may be seeing it differently. Kkenya (talk) 15:16, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
In that case, this was a likely copyright violation: if something is copied and pasted from a source, it should be acknowledged as such. It was not. In addition it was not ascribed to whoever said it--and if the artist said it, we should probably not cite those words at length. Drmies (talk) 15:23, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
I did not copy and paste it in the article. I copied and pasted it for you to see from the source which I cited. Mine in a short summation of what he said of which I kept out certain words specifically because I didn’t feel comfortable with the word beautiful or colours for that matter. There’s nothing wrong with what I wrote and citied.
I am still deeply appreciative of everything else including this, but you just didn’t read the source maybe because, the citation has been at end of the paragraph not the statement. Kkenya (talk) 16:05, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
{{subst:ZenAward|well-deserved ~~~~}} Kkenya (talk) 16:40, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
OK, thanks for clearing that up: that was not clear. But the paragraph "After five years...", that's sourced to that interview, and all the things in that paragraph that are presented as objective facts in Wikipedia's voice are actually paraphrases of what the subject himself said (and it doesn't say that he said those things). Drmies (talk) 17:33, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Lordy I see it. Got it. The most enlightening thing for me is the parenthetic bit. I’m thinking, ““of course he said it.” No, not established Kkenya (talk) 18:19, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Two replies
“The first revert was (in part) because of statements like "The colours on the boy's face were a stark contrast to his condition"--that's interpretation and needs to be ascribed explicitly to a source.”
and
“If the source has that, cite it concisely and/or paraphrase it, and make clear who's speaking.”
for reference only, for me, for clarity. The author/interviewed the subject, VC Mauer, is why I’m consistently surprised that many citations on WP don’t show author including some of my own I can write them in my sleep, but citing is meaningless obviously without a reliable source.
“And make it clear who’s speaking.” Kkenya (talk) 20:59, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
By the way, 751 of your 859 edits are to this article. Please read this guideline, WP:COI, and properly disclose any conflict of interest you may have. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 14:46, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
That was already bothering me. Ty Kkenya (talk) 14:51, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Quoted

I've quoted you in my recent evidence statement at ArbCom here. Due to word limitations, I only quoted a part of your statement. I hope it is ok with you. If you think I am misquoting you or that I misunderstood your point, please let me know and I'll refactor what I wrote or strike the quote out. As someone subject to being misquoted, I certainly don't want to do it myself to anyone. (To be clear, you are not a party and you are in no danger of being sanctioned for anything). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:54, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

  • No, Piotrus--it looks fine to me. I actually already read your comment, and followed to link to VM's analysis (the table was too small and complex for me, haha). I think I substantially agree with the things you said, at least the things that I have knowledge of. The selective quoting totally bothers me as well. I don't know--wait, I'm not a party? I thought I was. Do you think I should contribute, and if so, where? I know, I'm a former arb and should know this like the back of my hand, but it's been a while, and I don't envy the colleagues who are on the committee now. Drmies (talk) 14:33, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
    The parties were culled down I think after some folks raised concerns that the initial list was too large (then a few editors recently active in the topioc area that got the bright idea to get themselves to AE got added for good measure :>).
    Given that such proceedings are usually avoided by most sane people, your input would surely be welcomed (certainly I appreciated your comments so far). What I know is that discussions are ongoing at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland/Evidence, Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland and Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/World War II and the history of Jews in Poland/Analysis. Which, if any, would be of interest to you, that's of course if for you to decide :) You could check their histories to see which threads are active. I can only say that I'll be looking forward to anything you write, if you decide to join the discussions (most of which are not particularly long, all things considered).
    If you would like to make a comment directly related to my evidence (where I quote you), you could start an analysis section about it, I think? Some others have done so about some other parts of evidence already submitted. For example, another editor I quoted, Tryptofish, has done so here, with analysis (aka discussion) that already begun here. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:24, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Lynching of Allen Brooks

On 30 March 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lynching of Allen Brooks, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the site of the 1910 lynching of Allen Brooks was unmarked for 111 years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lynching of Allen Brooks. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Lynching of Allen Brooks), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Aoidh (talk) 00:03, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

March songs
my story today

thank you! - sharing impressions from vacation on Madeira 20-30 March, pics now at 25 March with ups and downs and two cats --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:19, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Sock farm target

Hi, I noticed you salted Draft:Raditya Adi and blocked the the most recent user who created it. It has been re-created by a new account and I'm wondering if you could take a look. Thanks! Uhai (talk) 04:09, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Request range block extension

You range previously tagged on a six-month block extension to range 2402:8100:2000::/35, a range that was the source of harassment against me. I looked back to see what was going on now that this extension has lifted and it's almost exclusively vandalism/incompetence. I don't expect a ton of great edits from any given IP range, but this one seems especially bad. I'm requesting you to consider an extension. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Adding that there's no indication the range is being used in a harassing manner at present. My concern is only with what seems like a range used to make frequent CIR and vandal edits. Should've clarified that out the gate. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2023).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Ironmouse

It appears FreedomBoy77 made good on his promise to evade their block. There's some interesting info on CU wiki if you're interested (last link on my user page there). -- Ponyobons mots 19:44, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

  • Hmm. Thanks. I looked at the video but did not quite understand what I was looking at--even a young person couldn't make sense of it to me. Drmies (talk) 00:38, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Mary Tileston Hemenway

Hey Drmies, another one of my unfortunate "finds" by patrolling Recent changes. A new SPA editor, KellyJeanLynch, who claims to be a PhD student researching Hemenway, has been stubbornly adding/keeping material in the article that is either WP:UNDUE, promotional, or both. I tried discussing the problems with the student on her Talk page, but she clearly "knew better" about what was appropriate to be in the article and what was not, so I just gave up a few minutes ago. BTW, my strong guess is that Special:contributions/76.64.77.74, who edited just before her, is also her, not that I'm accusing her of socking, but that's where the addition of a great deal of material started. At this point, my main objections to the article are stated on the student's Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:30, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments on Kelly's Talk page, but the material I object to is still in the article. You made only some non-substantive changes to the article. I'm willing to try once more to remove/trim the two portions of the article I believe to be unencyclopedic, but if you think I'm wrong, I'll defer to your judgment and let it go. The truth of the matter is I want to take the article off my watchlist so I don't have to look at it. :-) So, your opinion?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:36, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Oh, take it off, by all means. I looked at the history and made a few minor changes, also to show my good will toward the editor, but I haven't had the time to take the deep dive yet. Draft:Oscar James Campbell, Jr. is taking up a lot of my time. ;) Drmies (talk) 18:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Well, there's a lot to look at, in part because the editor made so many tiny edits and doesn't leave edit summaries. But the three big deletions that you made--some of that material (the family stuff, the brother on 242 Beacon Street) wasn't returned, and other material is now sourced--albeit it sometimes very poorly. Right now I'm looking through this to see if I can properly source one article. I would want a PhD student to do better than this, "The Late Mrs. Hemenway. Harper's Bazaar, March 24, 1894. Anyway, the situation is different now, and at least some of what you objected to is no longer there. Drmies (talk) 00:52, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, it's definitely better than it was. Putting aside all the minor errors (e.g., endless repetition of full names instead of just last names), there's still excessive detail on certain subjects and a little bit of the gushing is still there ("Mary Hemenway was known to be gracious and dedicated to social needs." and "The Reverend Charles Ames said she "simply went about doing good with pleasure in her tasks"." (who the hell is Ames anyway?)).--Bbb23 (talk) 13:29, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
As you probably already know, I haven't taken the article off my watchlist. I'm getting a kick out of watching you improve things (thanks for removing the fawning material). For some reason, I just noticed that although the title of the article is Mary Tileston Hemenway, the name in the opening sentence is Mary Porter Tileston Hemenway. Not a change by Kelly - it's been that way since its creation. Porter is her mother's maiden name. I seriously doubt at that time she would have adopted her mother's name as part of her name, but it's certainly not sourced as her name. Oh, and another thing. How does one "apparently" inherit $15M? Can I do that? I could afford to buy some more socks then; many of the ones I own have holes in them or are blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:28, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Just wanted you to know that I saw the comment you tagged me in...

...even though IP 86.28.234.94 removed it. At the time I made my initial comments I had a chat with a related admin and realize there's a lot more going on there than I initially thought. I had seen a few erroneous rollbacks at the time so I was on guard for that sort of thing. But for whatever it's worth, I'm not actually familiar with that editor prior to this. They must have gotten up to their initial round of shenanigans while I was on one of my long wikibreaks. Regardless I didn't want you to think I'd missed your message. Millahnna (talk) 14:25, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Splitting discussion for h3h3Productions

An article that been involved with (h3h3Productions) has content that is proposed to be removed and moved to another article (Ethan Klein). If you are interested, please visit the discussion. Thank you. Thats Just Great (talk) 19:55, 7 April 2023 (UTC)


Problems with an editor

I hate to bother you with something like this, but I'm at a bit of a loss. User Eni.Sukthi.Durres has made more than few edits, mainly to footballers' pages, that are not grammatically correct—often containing outright broken English, misused words, major typos, too much news-style detail (like subjective interpretations of how a player played in a match), and/or inconsistent chronologies. In two cases, Enea Mihaj and Jasir Asani, I have gone through the articles and fixed the grammatical issues, typos, and copyedited for spelling, grammar, and appropriate information. This user, however, has reverted my corrections and copyediting, all while aggressively claiming that they will "report me" if I don't stop "deleting useful contents." The problem is that I am fixing major grammatical problems and broken English—basic copyediting work that brings the article up to Wikipedia standards of clarity. I'm not sure why this user is so protective of their poorly written work, but I don't want to get into an edit-war with someone who insists on maintaining a poorly written, substandard article. Would you mind giving this a look and, if anything, intervening as an admin to help me establish my edits as improvements rather than assaults on this user's pride? Anwegmann (talk) 20:31, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Then why you don't improve my poor english instead of deleting all such as hasn't ever been, you must show respect to others work. However I'll wait for this user's answer and we must open a discussion at 2 players talk pages to fix step by step contents. Eni.Sukthi.Durres (talk) 01:33, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
It's your job to write acceptable English. Drmies (talk) 01:50, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
How much is my salary then? Or fix my poor english or don't intervene never, you revert all edits including correct updates, keep full responsibilites or 0, that's impossible, nobody has imponed a duty to you, thank you. Eni.Sukthi.Durres (talk) 21:10, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Your salary is the same as mine. Please see WP:CIR. This, "Twins in life twins also in the field of play, playing their first competitive season for Cesena under-17 squad coached by Filippo Masolini in Allievi Nazionali U17, where the attacking duo made each 16 appearances with Stiven scoring 11 goals and Cristian 14.", is not evidence of competence in English. I do not understand why you think you can just dump this ungrammatical stuff into our articles. In fact, there is not a single sentence in this edit that is grammatically correct. Drmies (talk) 00:18, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Suspicious username/concerns of socking

I have recently found $tar Anonymou$, a rollbacker, on English Wikipedia. What is a bit concerning is that their username is quite similar to User:$tar Anonymous, a currently blocked sockpuppet of User:Inoxent AR. I would like to say that according to this old SPI I found (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Inoxent_AR/Archive), Inoxent AR used his $tar Anonymous account for GHBH socking. Furthermore, this user page history of $tar Anonymous- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:$tar_Anonymous&oldid=1106412240 - shows some similarities with $tar Anonymou$'s current userpage.

Could this potentially be even more GHBH socking from User:Inoxent AR? -- Shadow of the Starlit Sky 01:59, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

  • Hey, I looked, and I blocked User talk:Inoxent Anonymous and User talk:$tar Anonymou$. What I need you to do is file it (at WP:SPI) and ask for the CU who looked at this before. These two account are CU-confirmed with each other, but I have no data on the other/master accounts. It doesn't really matter anyway, I guess: the edits and the usernames make it clear enough. Drmies (talk) 12:32, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
    • Just so we know, should we tag $tar Anonymou$ as a sockpuppet of Inoxent AR or should we leave their userpage as it is? -- Shadow of the Starlit Sky 17:48, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
      • Well, if you file the SPI, the clerk is likely to make a recommendation or tag them automatically. Just to make things clear: I confirmed them to each other, not to the master. That identification is behavioral, in various ways. Drmies (talk) 00:23, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Pestering

I want you to know that I have chosen to regard your comment on my talk page as "pestering" me. Silly, I know, but what constitutes pestering is a purely subjective judgment, right? Anyway, I'd ask you not to do it again. Thank you kindly. OckRaz talk 03:54, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) The fact that you have "chosen" to regard it as such is disruptive. Furthermore, the fact that you seemingly can't take criticism and feel the need to hurtle it back at others is a sign that you are WP:NOTHERE. I suggest that you stop digging yourself into a hole. - ZLEA T\C 05:45, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
As ZLEA indicates, "choice" isn't really appropriate here. I've blocked you from editing Acroterion's talk page, and if you spread this to other pages, including mine, I will not hesitate to expand this block. Drmies (talk) 13:48, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Could you have a look?

Hey! Can you use your magic powers on 117.237.192.0/18. You're the last CU in the block log. I've just put a long-term block on the range but I've made it a hard block because there are logged-in accounts that are clearly the same person. Can you check it's not going to cause too much collateral damage and act accordingly if it is? Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:27, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

  • Hey Harry, so that asshole has a name? I never knew. I see that CU has already been run so I'm going to leave it, if that's OK. Last time I looked there was just too much else there for me to hardblock that range, although I'd love to. Drmies (talk) 20:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Recent revert

May I know why would you revert my edit in T. Raja Singh. Quabizabdul (talk) 00:22, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Joel Campbell Du Bose

First, De La Soul!!! That is a fantastic photo and it put a smile on my face. The reason I was stopping by is because you might be interested in this draft (or not). There is more about him than I was able to access but above being an Alabama legislator for a bit, he was a historian who wrote Alabama History, a textbook used in schools for decades among other possibly interesting stuff. S0091 (talk) 19:54, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

  • S0091, that looks very interesting. I can't read the newspapers.com articles, but I'll get to work on it. Let's get this on the front page! [5] Drmies (talk) 14:42, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
    Awesome! You have access to Newspapers.com via WP:Library, which is now part the suite so you do not have to request access/have different login. One them is an obit and another is a retrospective of his life that will likely be helpful. S0091 (talk) 15:12, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
    Well, a little bot came by and changed the Newspapers links so now not as straight forward to access via the WP Library. I went ahead and added the basic biographical information from them but I am not the best writer so do fix anything. S0091 (talk) 18:18, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

CU stuff

Hey Drmies, hope you have been well. Since you have been involved in that SPI case [6], I wanted to discuss this with you. One editor there, Gugrak has accused several editors of being the same person (in the first report they were found to be unrelated, the second report is still open). Just an hour ago Gugrak added another editor immediately after a content dispute. From my experience, editors who are so keen on accusing their opponents of socking, often are socking themselves. Gugrak within 2 months has made more than 750 edits, and in the first week on Wikipedia was able to use Twinkle for many things like an experienced editor. Idk if the CU policy allows for a check on the Gugrak account in these circumtances. Hence I thought asking you instead of going to the SPI page. Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:01, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

  • Hey, yeah, thanks. I looked at the SPI and remember it. What Amanda said there really applies here as well. I don't disagree with your observation, but we need something tangible in order to run that tool, otherwise it's a fishing expedition (that's the term used in the manual...). I actually thought I had it for that SPI, which is why I ran it, but for this one, we need more--like a tie, or a suggested tie, to an established editor. If you can make that case I can look closer. I know that makes it much more difficult, but that's the name of the game. Keep me posted. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:05, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
  • I'll add that the history also makes me wonder. Are there similarities with earlier accounts in similar articles? Drmies (talk) 21:08, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
    • I understand. The thing is that Gugrak does not have a particular topic of interest. They make an edit related to the Balkans now, then 2 minutes later they make an edit related to the Arctic and then 2 minutes later an edit related to Indonesia. They just revert here or there, apparently they keep an eye on the recent changes feed page. So, at least for me, it is impossible to connect them with another editor I know. Gugrak has 2 things that can describe them: 1. their edits are only reverts 2. in many cases they either do not put a full stop in their last sentence, or if they put a full stop they do not put space between the full stop and their username signature. This is all I can say, maybe someone in the future might have sth better to say on the matter. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:19, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
      • OK--thanks. Yes, I don't think those SPI reports are going anywhere, but let's see what the future brings. Drmies (talk) 21:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
        • For the sake of being correct, they have also some non-revert edits, including the creation of an article named Golden Larnax. The article where they have more edits seems to be Operation Valuable, one of several war articles concerning Albanians that they have edited. It is obvious that Gugrak has considerable info about the Balkans and Albania in particular. Gugrak seems to be in the UAE, since they use GoogleBooks links that contain the .ae domain. Anyways, as you said, without a suspected master account this all is of little value. Take care, Ktrimi991 (talk) 21:46, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Disruption continuing at 2020 United States presidential election in Pennsylvania

This is the page which you recently made an edit-warring block; RFPP had it semi'd, but full might be in order, as the content in question is continuing against consensus (shitposting). Iseult Δx parlez moi 01:31, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Hump Back (Japanese band)

I was going to put the name origin story back into Hump Back (Japanese band) somewhere below the lead, but first I checked the reference. (1) I can't read Japanese; (2) even if I could use Google Translate to identify the text supporting the story, it's just a bunch of social media. So, even though it was a cute story, I can't properly reference it, so I'll let it go. Cheers! —Anomalocaris (talk) 01:31, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

  • OK, sounds good. And if it were properly sourced I wouldn't have minded--but it's just not the kind of thing that should be in the lead. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:55, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

You may not be interested

But you ran across one of the editors here last year. [8]. They’re right about the conspiracy theorist though, don’t know about the rest, just the way they are going about it. Doug Weller talk 10:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Bulgar Khanate

Hello, you're helping Bulgarian far-right nationalists to manipulate and vandalize the initially Bulgar, later Bulgarian state Bulgar Khanate. I'm not sure you do it on purpose, intentionally or not but you firstly need to make a research on Bulgars (not to be confused with Bulgarians) and Volga Bulgaria and other Oguric peoples such as Onogurs, Utigurs, Kutrigurs. I assume you did not do that on purpose. Have a good day. 𐰴𐰺𐰀:𐰆𐰍𐰺 · Karakylchyg 19:08, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

  • User:Karak1lc1k, after almost ten years on Wikipedia you should know better than to commit such gross violations of WP:AGF. That passive-aggressive stuff, it's despicable. I'm going to leave you a warning on your own talk page, and if you continue edit warring you are likely to get blocked for that. Then there's the possible POV pushing, of course, and I am going to leave a "Contentious topics" warning as well. Drmies (talk) 21:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

You're right of course

I simply sometimes 'have a day'. Apologies for getting my knickers in a twist over that stuff. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 23:24, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

April songs
my story today

Thank you for noticing. - I loved to see Marian Anderson and her story of protest against discrimination by singing on Easter Sunday 9 April 1939 on the Main page yesterday. Impressions of Easter here and music here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:52, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

My story today, Messiah (Handel), was my first dip into the FA ocean, thanks to great colleagues. - a few pics added, one day missing --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:58, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

I added that day, and actually all up to yesterday. Huub Oosterhuis died, may refs are in Dutch, some facts need a ref. I'll go out now, and dream of someone having filled the blanks when I return ;) - I'll nominate now, or it may be too late. "with empty hands" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:14, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

He's on the Main page, with many red links. - Today's stories are about Johanna Geisler and Huub Oosterhuis, a singer and a songwriter. More here if you have time. - Instead of filling red links, I went for a concert. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:35, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I filled one of the red links, but now Irma Blank died, and had no article. - Brighter: today is the 80th birthday of John Eliot Gardiner. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:57, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Questionable content added by IP range you blocked for long-term abuse

Hey Drmies, I noticed you partially blocked the IP range 2600:1700:C000:0:0:0:0:0/36 from several pages a few months ago, citing long-term abuse. I thought you may want to know that I came across this IP range continuously adding unsourced lists of character appearances to the Universal Studios Japan article without providing a single source. The user has been adding this particular section on and off for the past several months, and several users have reverted the addition of this section each time. Although someone started a talk page thread about these lists six months ago, the IP range in question has never touched the talk page.

Since you were the admin who p-blocked this IP range, I wanted to bring this to your attention. I was wondering if you were willing to either protect the Universal Studios Japan page or extend the page block. Thanks. – Epicgenius (talk) 19:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Moro Rebellion

Can you take a look at the editing by NmWTfs85lXusaybq on this article. There is discussion on the talk page, but no consensus (1-1), and the editor keeps reverting to their preferred version. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I have protected the article and will monitor. Johnuniq (talk) 03:29, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, I was just coming here to let Drmies know not to bother checking it out. 3O has been requested. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:41, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Beyond My Ken's statement is inaccurate. I'm making a constructive rewrite of his material which has not been done before. That's not edit warring. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:51, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Hmm I just see you removing content. Drmies (talk) 14:29, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
The first sentence of his material has been summarized by original material and the third sentence provides no further information. So, I had to remove both of them. The second sentence can be rewritten and summarized by the material I provided, which has not been done in any of substantive contributions on Moro Rebellion made by Beyond My Ken and I. I think this kind of edit is constructive.
For more information, please read my suggestion for modification with the highlight difference on Talk:Moro_Rebellion#Merge_of_section_"Tactics"_and_section_"Controversy". Beyond My Ken simply ignores all my suggestions by a POV charge against me without assuming good faith. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 16:18, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
I am not against trimming that section in the way you suggested; I am opposed to erasing Trump from the article altogether. Putting that under "popular culture" is not the most elegant way of handling it; I'm sure a better solution can be found. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:47, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your feedback. From my understanding, you're fine with the way of trimming the first sentence of his material and replace the second sentence to the summarized material rewritten by me. Your only concern is the removal of the third sentence. Putting that into a quote could be a good option. If you're still not fine with this, I will try to come up with another option later.
The conspiracy theory mentioned by Donald Trump has been included in references of Moro Rebellion and John J. Pershing. But both of them didn't included that in their materials. I think conspiracy theorists always provide different kinds of conspiracy theories which are not worth mentioning. Denying a conspiracy theory can't provide any further information. It's not necessary for an article about history to include the denial of a conspiracy theory as material. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 19:53, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
I'm putting the last sentence mentioning Trump into a quote for your concern. Talk:Moro_Rebellion#Merge_of_section_"Tactics"_and_section_"Controversy" is asking for third opinions. Could you provide a third opinion on that talk page? NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 20:09, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
I disagree. A conspiracy theory is worth mentioning if secondary sources make it so, and that's what happened here. Military Times ran it (from the wire, I guess), Foreign Affairs devoted a lengthy article to it, and here is a monograph--published by Springer, so YMMV, but still. I find references in JSTOR too; see this report. So, if the burden, via FRINGE, is that reliable sources discuss the ridiculous ideas of someone, then that burden is met here. Drmies (talk) 20:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
OK, let's keep that sentence in material. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 20:49, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
I have updated my suggestion on Talk:Moro_Rebellion#Suggested_Trimming. Are you fine with that now? Please check it again and leave your opinion there. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 21:02, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
NmWTfs85lXusaybq has been warned by an admin. No need to keep this open. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:38, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Additionally, in the words of a wise admin, "This is not a debating club". Drmies (talk) 20:53, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Wikihounding

Please note that the editor has started to follow me to articles that I've edited recently (and frequently), and which they've never edited before: Flatiron Building, Enemy of the people, The Palisades (Hudson River), Nazi Party. Martin Bormann. I warned them on their talk page [9], which they deleted, as is their right. Please consider warning them about their behavior. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:11, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

I have the right to edit these articles, because I have a good reason. Don't make such a POV charge against me. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:14, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
I am not charging you with making POV edits, I am charging you with following me to articles that I frequently edit and which you have never edited before, for the purpose of Wikihounding, something that you do not have the right to do. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:17, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
All my edits on these articles have a good reason. You are making a POV charge against me, just like you did on Talk:Moro Rebellion. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:18, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
It is not the quality of your edits which is in question -- although several went against talk page consensus -- it is the act of following an editor to articles they have recently edited which you have never edited before which constitutes Wikihounding. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
WP:WIKIHOUNDING: The important component of hounding is disruption to another user's own enjoyment of editing, or disruption to the project generally, for no overridingly constructive reason. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:26, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
As I said, all my edits on these articles have a good reason. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:27, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
My edits have no business with BMK. I have a good reason to support the restoration of the original image in The Palisades (Hudson River), which means I'm on BMK's side in their dispute. That's definitely not a harassment. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:35, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Which is irrelevant, since you went to those articles in a campaign to harass me. Don't worry, admins understand what is and isn't harassment, and don;t need you to quote from the policy page that you just read for the first time. I trust their judgment in this. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:40, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
It seems that you are wikilawyering. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:42, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
It may seem that way to you, but presenting evidence of a violation of behavioral policy is not Wikilawyering -- again, something that admins understand. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:45, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Then you don't need to repeat this again and again. Don't put your off-topic comments everywhere. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:47, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
I will put comments on the talk pages of whatever articles you follow me to, in order to allow editors to evaluate your edits with the knowledge of your ulterior motive in coming to that article to edit. If you want me to stop, the solution is quite easy: stop following me. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:02, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
It's your right to make your comments. I just point that your comments are off-topic. Besides, I will defend my edits there. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 05:13, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
It's Beyond My Ken who made a POV charge against me on Talk:Moro Rebellion. I'm not just opposing him on any other article. In fact, I help him format his references in Flatiron Building and Enemy of the people. I pointed out the lack of reference in his material on Enemy of the people and he did add a reference later. The edits on Nazi Party and Martin Bormann are irrelevant to him. I'm on his side to oppose the replacement of the original image on The Palisades (Hudson River). Anyway, it's definitely not a form of WP:HOUND. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 05:35, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
I'll try once more to explain, and then I'll just leave it alone. It's not about your having a POV, it's not about the quality of the edits, it's not about whether you agree or disagree with me, it's all about your following me to articles you never had any interest in until we had a content dispute. I should not have to look over my shoulder on articles I'm heavily invested in and see you behind me. There are currently 6,646,717 articles on English Wikipedia. That you should chose a half-dozen to edit which I have just edited recently, and which I've edited heavily before, is no coincidence. It means that you deliberately chose to go to those articles. It's also no coincidence, I think, that most of these edits happened after I stopped engaging with you on Talk:Moro Rebellion because of your WP:BLUDGEONing of that discussion. Perhaps you were motivated to follow me as a way to get me to engage again, I don't know, but I want it stopped. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:31, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
I've just noticed that admin Johnuniq has warned you against continuing, so I'm going to collapse this section. Drmies can re-open it if they like. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:38, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Protection page request

Drmies, Hello, I'm here to request for indefinite semi protection need to my usertalkpage from personal attack by ip editors when we revert their edits on pages, i hope you understand my probelm and help to resolve my problems at this time. in past my usertalk page also was vandalized by many ip editors. Kind regards 🥇ÀvîRâm7(talk)🩺 15:14, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

  • Hmm, I'm sorry--I'm not opposed in principle, but I don't see enough to warrant that somewhat extraordinary step. If it increases we can reconsider. Drmies (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
I'm very upset for about that but we are fine to your reply, thanks for reply.Kind regards.🥇ÀvîRâm7(talk)🩺 04:01, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your helpful contributions, especially reverting that troll on my talk page! User3749 (talk) 16:24, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Milesgillham

Why do they discover only after being blocked that using one's real name is a poor choice? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:13, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

You mean Deepfriedokra isn't your real name?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:46, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Not a vandal but a seriously clueless IP who is editwarring over the mess they made even after three or four warnings

122.106.1.123 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

They are disrupting Barry Humphries, who just died. We need to keep the article clean (I think it's even going to ITN), but technically this incompetent IP (copyvio + broken links + broken English + random unnecessary trivia, even after several TP warnings) isn't vandalizing so I'm not going to AIV. Any help appreciated. Softlavender (talk) 08:50, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Editor spamming Wikipedia with his own spammy fake articles as references

RahulRajputWiki (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I just discovered this guy and left him a usertalk warning. Could people keep an eye on him and block if necessary? He is clearly WP:NOTHERE. Thanks. Softlavender (talk) 08:04, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Looks like the same person as BalaArvinda and ArvindaRana. I'm investigating. --Kinu t/c 08:13, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Yep. They are all spamming Wikipedia with articles from junk aggregator sources -- websites called things like TheShahab, TheToughTackle, MichiganSportsZone. Softlavender (talk) 08:20, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
See also Himanshugulati123 and Sandhu navneet. I think a SPI might be in order here, as there are likely more. I'll do my best to revert some of the refspam and add those sites to the blacklist. --Kinu t/c 08:27, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
I don't personally have time to file an SPI, but if someone else wants to do so, then great. Otherwise, I think it's fine to continue to whackamole to get rid of them, or use CU as well if someone wants to. Softlavender (talk) 08:52, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
I'm looking into it. It's always disheartening when you see usernames like that and check, and find that they're operating from already-blocked /32 ranges. Kinu, thank you for doing that: I'm glad you have those skills. Drmies (talk) 14:45, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Kinu, were you not a CU at one time? I'm looking at this range, and it's huge--but there's also an immense amount of shit coming from it, from the IPs and from the accounts, and there's a ton of accounts that are fishy (logged in often, never edited, usernames), and no fewer than 555 blocked accounts. So that skews the "collateral damage" balance a bit, but I don't know if it shifts it enough for a hard block. Ponyo, would you mind having a look? It's the IPv6 range, blocked by at least six admins including for LTA behavior--including CU blocks by NinjaRobotPirate and Materialscientist. At some point a hard block is warranted, IMO. Oh, the other range, the IPv4 range, is huge too, with tons of blocked users and I'm going through the list for the obvious and easily confirmed spammers. This one too, though, I think a hard block is warranted... Drmies (talk) 15:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure I know which /32 you're talking about without even taking a peek under the covers. I'll poke around when my meeting is wrapped up.-- Ponyobons mots 15:38, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Thank you Ponyo--and as it happens I looked at that range a few days ago as well. It's really something. Hope you are having a lovely meeting! I'm leaving to avoid one! Drmies (talk) 15:40, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
Avoidance is usually my first instinct, but I'm opening the meeting so...-- Ponyobons mots 15:43, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
I don't think we can hardblock it; the entire first page of results takes us back to just two days ago. There is sooooo much UPE/spam there. You could pretty much run a check every two days and just block a handful of spammers.-- Ponyobons mots 17:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

CU-confirmed with the above, blocked for a combination of CU, behavioral and username hints, and material deleted: User:Himanshu132001, Draft:10News.Live; User:LyricsLatest23; User:Mountainpackers (already blocked by Materialscientist, user page deleted); User:Fitness Flake; User:Rahul Choudhary 27; User:Infocontribution; User:Digirushsolutions (already blocked by 331dot); User:Dontgivedamn; User:UTKARSH THAKUR3090, Draft:NorthYatra; User:All Arabic Perfumes; User:Helenachris, Draft:Dushyant Savadia and User:Helenachris/sandbox; User:Graficoodesign (blocked in 2021!). Drmies (talk) 15:35, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Wow, what a mess. Thanks to you and Ponyo for looking into this further. (For what it's worth, I've never been a CU, but I have considered throwing my name in the hat during the next cycle...) --Kinu t/c 15:58, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
That IP range is the gift that keeps on giving. I blocked a few more spammers. It's kind of crazy how many spammers are on there, but it must cover some kind of cyberpunk-style megacity. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:07, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks all, I appreciate the time and effort. What a freaking nightmare. Softlavender (talk) 18:59, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

  • Softlavender, I'm sure you noticed that I pinged the BEST of the BEST! Yes, a nightmare, indeed. The only thing one can hope for, besides a rangeblock, is that all those customers who see their drafts and articles deleted ask for their money back. Drmies (talk) 14:06, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Disruption on talk page by blocked editor

User:Missy elliott2, who you previously blocked, has created a large number of frivolous unblock requests. TPA revocation may be appropriate. Partofthemachine (talk) 04:48, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Melibio

User:ABHammad has brought to my attention that COI edits from an IP and a new user are back at MeliBio. It brings to mind the problem written about in a recent Signpost article, if I remember it correctly. (See brief new user page User:Foodieee.) I forwarded this problem from the User talk:MB page and you looked at this two months ago. It seems it needs another look by an administrator. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 09:14, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Problematic user

Hi Drmies. I stumbled across what appears to me to be a problematic user, and I was wondering if you and/or your stalkers could have a look. On the surface, they appear to be a constructive user, but looking at their mainspace edits, I see that none of the online references they add exist (or if a "source" exists, it's completely irrelevant). They enclose all of the URLs in <nowiki>s, which appears to be an attempt to obscure the fact that they're not valid sources. (Here are just a few examples. In Maria de Knuijt: [10] [11], in Constance Mayer: [12] redirects to irrelevant page [13], in Florian Süssmayr: [14] [15] exists, but is irrelevant) And it's not just the "online" refs. They also supply offline refs, such as for an obviously false statement, which an actually constructive user deletes in this edit. (The year of death in that paragraph is also incorrect.) I am inclined to distrust everything they've done, and it may be a case where all of their edits should be reverted. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:22, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

  • Shoot Mandarax, I wish you'd pitch me something easy--no wonder you hadn't been by here in such a long time. Drmies (talk) 00:30, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
  • OK. I got more digging to do, but see this. It looks like the Ben Broos reference in the Knuijt article was made up. Do me a favor? Ben Broos seems to have died recently--he has no article in the Dutch wiki, only in the German and French ones (oddly enough). I couldn't find a resume/bibliography. Can you? Drmies (talk) 00:38, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
    • Sorry, I didn't intend for this to be burdensome. I just wasn't sure what to do, and I know that you usually do know what to do. Perhaps this should be on some noticeboard or other. For a Broos bibliography, will WorldCat do?
      Selecting another "fact" to investigate... Constance Mayer's supposed relationship with and marriage to Joseph Ducreux, added here. All of the refs about their relationship are either nonexistent or about entirely unrelated subjects. I tried to independently find anything about it, but I was, unsurprisingly, unsuccessful. Honestly, I think we've both put in much more effort to AGF than they deserve; they just seem to be making things up and adding fake refs. An IP reverted the part about Ducreux; thanks to CaroleHenson for doing what I thought should be done but wasn't bold enough: completely reverting the user's edits on that page. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 06:24, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
      • It's like handling fake news: it takes a while to prove that something isn't there, like that Ben Broos article. Drmies (talk) 14:19, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
        • I reverted the edits on the Constance Mayer article because I saw the same issues - invalid urls, use of nowiki for bare url citations, the information didn't seem to be correct. I should have posted something on the user's page. Very strange edits.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:09, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
          • Thanks CaroleHenson--feel free to add a note to the user's talk page. It's a strange case indeed, and I don't drop such blocks lightly, so your support helps. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 16:54, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
            • Okay, Drmies, I added a note on the user's page here.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:30, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
              • Thanks, CaroleHenson. Mandarax, there really is no doubt, right, that this was fake. The Ben Broos thing sort of clinched it though it took me a while. He's dead and I can't find a website/resume, and he did published a chapter in that Yale UP book on Vermeer, but not with that title or on that topic. I loathe that kind of behavior and it reminds me of a long-blocked sock/LTA/harasser who had a similar interest.
                I moved the last article from mainspace; it's at Draft:Maria de Knuijt and I could use your help! Drmies (talk) 14:28, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
              • Sorry, I haven't been around for a few days. Wow, thanks CaroleHenson for the great work on Maria de Knuijt!
                Y'know, even though I said "I think we've both put in much more effort to AGF than they deserve", I still find myself wanting to AGF. Although I've only marginally checked, their latest draft appears to use refs that are properly formatted, exist, and are actually what they claim to be. Their earlier edits remain completely baffling to me. Maybe they've learned their lesson, but those earlier fake facts backed up by fake refs do not signal a promising start for a constructive contributor. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 20:14, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
                • Mandarax, I missed you at the metal show in the Sanctuary last night. Everything OK? Well, listen, if you checked over that draft, and it seems proper to you, by all means, submit it and maybe accept it. It's mostly a resume, of course, but I do not want to stand in the way of a notable artist being represented. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 15:42, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
                  • The Sanctuary looks like a fun venue, but somehow it seems to not have an article here. From the ad, it looks like last night's show would've been more psychedelic than metal. Are you going to Puke Turns 17 tonight?
                    As I said, I "only marginally checked" the refs, and by that I mean I saw that the links were actually clickable, and I clicked on a few just to see if they went where they claimed to go. So, no, I haven't done anything close to checking over the article, and I don't intend to – about all I have the energy to do around here lately is mindless stuff like typo fixing. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 22:33, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
                    • It is fun. I got a church pew from them that I'm restoring, all oak. No, I'm not going there tonight, and my daughter isn't really into puck rock--but it's a younger audience. I did hang out today with a few people who are on the board and are involved--and I met the guy who runs this place--really interesting. There's actually things happening here. I know how you feel about what to do here on Wikipedia: maybe we've just been here too long and the thrill is gone. Drmies (talk) 00:57, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
                • CaroleHenson, holy moly. That was an amazing job you did. Thank you so much! Let's get it on the front page! Update: nominated. I was going to nominate Maria Thins too but I didn't realize there was an article already, and though the article is a thousand times improved, it's not five times expanded. Drmies (talk) 15:43, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Re. your ping on the unblock request

I suspect they're using ChatGPT to generate references and article content. The seemingly plausible but made-up references, and the rapid pace of editing, would fit with that explanation. The only reason why I thought that it might not be intentionally malicious is that some people seem to believe that these AIs are magic oracles that speak the truth instead of basically a fancy version of a Markov chain. There was someone else at ANI a few weeks ago who seemed genuinely confused to learn that if you ask ChatGPT to write you a Wikipedia article, it won't analyze the sources and understand them, it'll just make up some random shit that sounds vaguely related to the title. This perception is probably not helped by the fact that these things are now being grafted onto search engines, making them even more useless than they already were. Anyway, the user's responses aren't encouraging and I don't think they should be unblocked. Spicy (talk) 22:03, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Possible sock-puppet

Hi Drmies!

Although User:Kaldari has retired from Wikipedia is User:Omphalographer here on Wikipedia a likely sock puppet for Kaldari or are Kaldari's edits here too old? The IP's may not match perfectly as Omphalographer is using a single purpose account. --Marshallsumter (talk) 23:02, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

  • Eh, I don't know why you would think that. Why do you think that? Drmies (talk) 01:00, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
  • When someone singles you out for special attention and behaves like a sock puppet the only recourse is to ask those with the tools to find out. So that's why I'm asking. Omphalographer has edited here in March 2023. He either is likely a sock puppet for Kaldari or he is not. If you can check please do so. If you want proof he's been harmful see m:user_talk:Vituzzu#Coincidences_of_behavior_between_Omphalographer_and_Kaldari, m:user:Marshallsumter#Omphalographer-Kaldari_coincidences and m:user_talk:Marshallsumter#Omphalographer-Kaldari_coincidences. If you are worried that Omphalographer hasn't harmed Wikipedia as Kaldari did using a sock puppet, if Omphalographer is a sock puppet of Kaldari then he has already harmed Wikipedia in the past and should not be given the opportunity to do it again. But that's up to you not me. No problem if you don't want to check. --Marshallsumter (talk) 06:23, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
    • The things you are pointing at are on Meta. I'm not on Meta, I have no rights on Meta, and so there is nothing for me to check, since Kaldari hasn't been active on en-wiki since August 2022.
      I see now that you've been trying to link those two accounts for a while. I thought I recognized your name, and there it is, on your user page, my comment: "Marshallsumter, I'm afraid I can't help you since I have no rights to anything outside en-wiki." I saw the section on m:User talk:Vituzzu, and apparently Vituzzu didn't see any need for action either. I don't know exactly what you are doing here; it seems to me you are spending a huge amount of time on this matter, and making others spend time on it too. I think it is time to drop it. Drmies (talk) 16:29, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Suspicious-looking user

Hello Drmies. I was patrolling new userpages when I noticed OliverDidThat, a new user. They are fraudulently claiming that they are extended confirmed, a reviewer and rollbacker, although their account was created yesterday. They list seven barnstars, although they are all copied from other talk pages (User_talk:JeffSpaceman#A_barnstar_for_you! I'm assuming the others are too as they only have 1 mainspace edit when I checked). To top it all off, they even contradict their own userpage (how can they have been a "17-year-old junior in high school" when they are apparently born in 2010??) and link to their non-existent talk page. It all just seems very fishy. Would you mind taking a look? Schminnte (talk • contribs) 16:42, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Now that I do more digging, almost all content is copied from User:JeffSpaceman. So odd. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 16:45, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. They also referenced User:Eggboyscooter there, and as it happens they are CU-confirmed with them--it's either the same person, or it's a bunch of school kids fucking around. Anyway, yes, copying user pages is usually a good indicator of NOTTHERE behavior. Take care, Drmies (talk) 16:51, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
For taking care of the user who copied my user page noted above. Cheers! JeffSpaceman (talk) 18:31, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Large institutional article cited only to itself, and creator is an SPA

I don't really know what to do about this, so I'm taking it here for viewpoints. Should it be tagged for lack of independent citations? AFDed? Sent to COIN? (Massively) trimmed? I don't know. Please, folks, do with it what you will and I will put it on my watchlist. Softlavender (talk) 01:47, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

  • Oh my, that's awful. I can't even find anything to redirect it to. I moved it into draft space, but AfD is probably the better option since I can find no secondary coverage. In addition, the thing doesn't even read like an encyclopedic article, with all its inline links, videos, external links, nor is the organizational structure clear at all. The move to draft space is kind of an emergency option; other editors may have better ideas. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 14:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • A request for comment about removing administrative privileges in specified situations is open for feedback.

Technical news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:22, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank You!

Hi there. Thank you so much for unblocking me and seeing reason. I truly appreciate it! Maxwell King123321 01:46, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Thank you for reverting the sock edits on Christina Aguilera article, i think you forgot to block Maxwell King123321 for being a sockpuppet though, as his account is still active. Aaron106 (talk) 22:25, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

  • Thanks. Almost missed out on $5! Drmies (talk) 22:29, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  • Apologies, Drmies - I should probably have gone back and closed the SPI case after I blocked the 204060baby account - I agree with you that the accounts appear unrelated to one another. There is something odd going on though, as 204060baby has talked about making edits in a sandbox, and I can't find any sandbox of theirs - I may come back to this later. Anyway, sorry you got caught up in this. Cheers Girth Summit (blether) 07:16, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
    • Girth Summit When communicating with Maxwell, he mentioned "so after I frustratingly finished the lead in my sandbox, I forgot to remove a couple of things", however 204060baby never created a sandbox. So how could he remove a couple of things and never have one; He was referring to this 35,000 byte sandbox contribution that was posted by Maxwell the day of the conversation May 2 but then replied to himself on the wrong sock account. They have identical grammar, and only message to advance his own interests on the article as seen on 204060baby talk page and the Christina Aguilera article. Aaron106 (talk) 08:07, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
      • Maxwell doesn’t edit his Sandbox since January 28 2023 [21] and on May 2 2023 [22] decides to edits his sandbox, then on the same day hours later 204060baby tells Maxwell "I frustratedly finished the lead in my sandbox"[23] even though he doesn’t have a sandbox.. [24] Cmon. He is using a VPN. Aaron106 (talk) 09:53, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

39.42.0.0/16

Hello again. After you blocked the IPs on this range for talk page disruption, they keep adding the same nonsense to their own user talk pages, like this. Should their TPA be revoked or should they be left alone? Thank you in advance for your input. Zoe Trent Fan🎤💍 18:11, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

  • That really is just next-level crazy--incompetent, disruptive, etc. Thanks--I revdeleted a bunch of this since no one needs to run into that stuff. Drmies (talk) 23:53, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Zen-like is what you’ve been like.

zen cookie for your help

Kkenya (talk) 17:14, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

Jacobkennedy again

...this time appearing as Hamburgermeats. I may be wrong, but the edits to LGBT rights in the United Arab Emirates are strongly reminiscent of recent and past incarnations of the sock master: They are bound and determined to have all of their long laundry list of supposed penalties under that parameter in the infobox.

What is the best thing to do here? Should I make a report at SPI? AukusRuckus (talk) 14:49, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

See this

[25] I've just added [26] after RP's full protection expired. Doug Weller talk 12:19, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

I guess better you did that than someone else. Doug Weller talk 16:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

You know more than I do

Is Niuma123 the same person as Zuzanna Jablonska?--Bbb23 (talk) 16:53, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

  • Interesting, Bbb. The geolocation doesn't support it, and there seems to be no proxy usage. But sheesh this is fishy. Ha, you can ask them and see what they say. Drmies (talk) 16:57, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
    • Are the sources Niuma123 is adding better? Hard to verify, at least for me.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:00, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
      • Some of them certainly look better--but the whole thing is still a resume. I wonder if Mandarax can take a day off from spelling and diacritical marks, haha. All those links to the city of Cham, that's just ridiculous. But way too many artists' articles suffer from that. Drmies (talk) 17:06, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
        • In keeping with my new policy, I took just about the briefest look possible, and the thing that immediately jumped out at me was the odd addition of <nowiki>s by "both" of these users. It's obvious that they were desperate to edit and realized that geolocation would betray them, so they moved! MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 01:39, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Request on 01:42:15, 10 May 2023 for assistance on AfC submission by Badabingbadaboong

What I need help is finding examples of a primary or independent, reliable, secondary source of information. The user Drimes really didnt go in depth on what an example of those sources are, he just shot down my draft. I dont mind that, but could that person please go further in depth on the problems with my website, considering that there's literal proof that DC Comics announced that this is a crossover event? Or at least show me examples of correct independent primary reliable source of information?

Badabingbadaboong (talk) 01:42, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

  • Badabingbadaboong, the very fact that DC Comics announced that really doesn't mean anything. Existence does not add up to notability by our standards. I just read One Breath From Drowning, which was fun and you can buy it here--in other words, it actually exists, and yet it's not automatically notable. This is one of the reasons why you need independent secondary sourcing: to prove that this is worth noting. Primary sources cannot do that. See Secondary source, and see WP:RS. This is not the kind of rule/policy/guideline that means much for comic/anime editors in general, I think, judging from the innumerable articles we have in that field, but it is what counts in the project as a whole. I can't find those examples for you--and of course the best thing to do is to wait until these things actually appear and are written about. Something that's not written about shouldn't be in Wikipedia. Drmies (talk) 02:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

American Idol (season 5)

OH MY GOD, I cannot believe the state of that article. I'm going to have to steel myself for that one... Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:59, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

  • We actually watched a bit of that season. Soul patrol! Drmies (talk) 03:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
  • Yeah it's bad. Funny: that must have been the last season I paid attention to, but I remember a bunch of it. I kind of liked Daughtry, and McPhee was cute. I liked Yamin too. Oh, Pickler, haha, she was funny in that cute Southern way. Raised by her grandpa, or something. well, good luck with it! Drmies (talk) 03:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
    • I gave up after Adam Lambert lost (maybe season 8?) I’m doing these seasons in order, so season 4 is up next. The first 4 season articles were nowhere near as bad as these ones starting with season 5. Bgsu98 (Talk) 04:00, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
      • There's a kind of working group for the Eurovision Song Contest; they've been organized for years. I don't agree with all they prescribe but at least it's organized. Well, working on such an important cultural phenomenon, you really have an opportunity to Make A Difference® here! Drmies (talk) 14:40, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Juan Branco hell

Could you take a look at the article and the RfC on the Talk page? I've gotten to the point where I can't discuss anything with the passive-aggressive-not-a-new-user Imagritte. Anyway, the article is out of control because of the user's insistence that everything in the French article must be in the English version. One of the things I used to admire about the French was their love of argument. After all, I'm a rather argumentative fellow, so it felt comfortable, like I was more French than American. No matter how much my French friends and I argued, unlike many Americans, it never got personal. It was partly liking argument purely for argument's sake and partly fleshing things out where you might change the other person's mind, at least a little. This user isn't at all like my friends, although who knows how much Wikipedia and written interaction affect the dynamics. If you're willing to look into it, bon courage! --Bbb23 (talk) 16:18, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

  • Well, they don't seem to be part of this, so that's a start. Drmies (talk) 20:39, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
  • I guess the odds of them editing an article also edited by someone I just blocked aren't all that slim. I calculated that I placed 3,500 blocks the last academic year. Drmies (talk) 20:41, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
    • You count your blocks by academic year? You've lost all perspective on the real world...which may be a good thing. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 20:45, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
      • Haha, I wrote it up under "service" in my annual work plan. ;) I placed a note on that talk page, and declined a draft of theirs. I love me some good enthusiasm, but sheesh--so many editors come here and enact the bull in a china shop routine. Speaking of French, the filet mignon was on sale, for Mother's Day I presume (?), so Rosie and I ate one. I had forgotten how delicious that is. Drmies (talk) 20:57, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
        • I used to eat filet mignon when I was a kid. My mother bought meat wholesale from a supplier that provided meat to some of the better restaurants in town, so we were spoiled. I no longer eat red meat, though. I don't know how often you unblock someone, but maybe you could put that under, um, publications in your plan.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:11, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Unhelpful edit summaries

Hey Drmies. I have noticed that Dionis08 makes innapropriate comments towards other editors in edit summaries. They have several warnings about disruptive editing on their tp, but it seems that their edit summaries are even worse than the edits themselves. Comments of the kind of "Stop editing this page to compensate for your small wee wee","???????? Stop editing the page", "You may chomp down on my balls my good sir, stop editing the page ffs", "keep it like this ffs you guys are making me get a brain tumor", "Silly bot reverted my edit" ("silly bot" is a long-term editor). Given the large-scale disruptive editing and the edit summaries, I wonder whether the editor is ready to give a positive contribution to those articles or not. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:57, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you!

Howdy, I just wanted to stop by and say I appreciate your work.

I stumbled across a revision you made on David Petraeus and thought you deserved to hear this!

That's all, 'till next time. R. J. Dockery (talk) 19:59, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppeting case

Just so you know, it appears as though the editor Tonitorrent is a sockpuppet of Iliochori2. The account was setup just a few days ago, and it has only made edits to pages very actively edited by Iliochori2, using almost identical language, updates, and techniques. I just wanted to make you aware of this, as Iliochori2 is current banned from editing in the mainspace. Anwegmann (talk) 22:00, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Draft:The Spectacular

Mind taking a look at this draft about a Dutch TV series? I don't have access to some of the sources and the ones I can review are somewhat standard coverage but seems like there should be better sources out there. S0091 (talk) 16:50, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

  • Oh, it's a VPRO show--that's always a good sign. And it won the Gouden Kalf? That means it's basically automatically notable. I'll have a better look when I have some time: kids are coming home. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 20:34, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
  • OK, I added a source and moved it on to mainspace. I think I want to see that. It was a very tense time. Drmies (talk) 00:30, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Mazepa

While it is entirely your prerogative, I do not see how parachuting into a contentious topic and accusing an editor (me) of edit warring to introduce a category and threatening them (me) with sanctions is helpful. For starters, the "charge" was false - the category was there for months and we were discussing whether it should or not be removed. Most importantly, however, it's a blatant violation of AGF, particularly so given that two users were having a discussion in civil terms (especially for EE standards!).

I apologise for my part in accidentally undoing your edits, but I think you can easily check my version against the last edit by MVBW to see that the only change is or should be me recovering the bits removed due to sources being highlighted as broken by MVBW (except for a single sentence that I did not re-add by mistake, and which at this point I cannot re-add without being accused of edit warring). I resent that you jumped to the conclusion of malice, although I assume it's understandable. The fact that you were editing in between is simply unlucky, but fundamentally it needn't be an issue, since I completely agree with the changes you attempted to introduce. I might add a bit or two from the article by Subtelny that you removed from external links, but if I do I will do so in the text.

Now, I do not expect (much less demand) anything, but an apology would be nice, and the restoration of the archived links would be even better (with or without an apology!). I will hold no grudges either way. Alternatively, I will restore the broken links tomorrow so as to no incur a penalty for edit warring. Cheers. Ostalgia (talk) 18:06, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

  • Well, you did edit war, and you've restored that category four times, against the wishes of three different editors--me, My very best wishes, Lute88. Look: 1, 2, 3, 4. I'm putting those links here in case someone wants to take this to a noticeboard. Now, if that last one was an accident, why are you here yelling at me and demanding an apology? And why are you asking for my permission to restore archived links? No one is fighting over that: go ahead and do it. But since three different people have now deleted that category, you might take a hint: consensus for that is not on your side. Drmies (talk) 18:31, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
    • In a nutshell: mainstream historiography does NOT consider Mazepa a traitor. Only the the Russian propaganda machine does. A clear case of POV and WEIGHT. Has to be removed.--Aristophile (talk) 18:35, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
      • "Mainstream historiography" does not condemn (or exonerate) people of treason. A historian isn't a judge (and vice versa). That Mazepa was declared a traitor is a fact, and that he is perceived as one in the cultural memory of Russia (and, as the articled stated, in part of Ukraine) is so as well. It's not an issue of criminality (which is beyond the scope of Wikipedia) or value-judgement (also beyond our scope). A man's traitor can be another man's freedom fighter. You're welcome at the TP if you want to discuss it. Cheers. Ostalgia (talk) 19:02, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
    • I did not edit war against you, as can be surmised by my edit. I have no qualm with your edits, and I did not undo your edits - not on purpose, at any rate. As I said, I do not disagree with your edits. I have no intention of touching the category because we are discussing it in the talk page, which is what I think should've happened in the first place. I have no axe to grind, and I will not lose any sleep over whether Mazepa is in the "traitors" category (an odd category, but given the people cited there, one where Mazepa could well fit) or not. And finally, I have not yelled at you, and I have not demanded an apology (I explicitly said as much!). As I said, I am here to ask for the links to be restored, which is what I intended to do with my last edit, and to ask for you to calm down when intervening in EE. There's enough shit-throwing, aspersions and lack of AGF as it stands to have experienced editors and admins pile on that. Ostalgia (talk) 18:51, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
      • I don't understand edit warring "against" someone. And I really don't understand what you want. You're not demanding an apology, but you want an apology? For what? Never mind. And one more thing: Mazepa was declared a traitor by some entity--or by a historiographic tradition. The category makes him a traitor in Wikipedia's voice. That cannot be. Now, move on please. Drmies (talk) 20:02, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
        • Then what is the purpose of the category? Every single individual in that category was declared a traitor by some entity--or by a historiographic tradition. The category makes him a traitor in Wikipedia's voice. If that cannot be, then what is the purpose of the category? We're literally doing that for every member of the category. For the record, I do not oppose removing the category altogether. Cheers. Ostalgia (talk) 20:13, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
          • I don't know; I didn't create it. I mean, for Quisling or Benedict Arnold it seems pretty cut and dry and I don't think anyone would dispute it, but this is not one of those cases, it seems. The very existence of a category doesn't mean we should accept what it denotes as always an objective reality, and I really have no interest in defending the validity of this category. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 22:16, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 56

The Wikipedia Library: Books & Bytes
Issue 56, March – April 2023

  • New partner:
    • Perlego
  • Library access tips and tricks
  • Spotlight: EveryBookItsReader

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --10:03, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Some edit warring

Hello Drmies, responding to a copypatrol report I noticed the EW report and interactions between those two users; I noticed they had a massive edit war earlier today at List of women monarchs-- just an FYI. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 18:38, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Super8204

New IP: 2601:188:C500:49E0:2151:63E6:278A:8BBE. I'm on mobile, so it's harder to reach out the right venue for this. Thank you again for your help on my user page (: – Callmemirela 🍁 17:44, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

And 2601:188:C500:49E0:3581:F3D2:8D75:D0D0. – Callmemirela 🍁 18:40, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Khadim e Khass

Hello. Just wondered whether you recall the reason for your CU block of Khadim e Khass (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)? The article they created was updated by a user I've linked to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/BrookeCook and if Khadim e Khass is also linked then G5 applies. SmartSE (talk) 11:37, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

  • I'm not sure I follow, Smartse. I linked them to User:CloudFarr3r, but any link is good enough to delete via G5. (I'm not sure why I didn't delete it on the spot.) Anyway, as the tag on Cloudfarr's user page suggests, and the rationale for the block on the range, there's so much socking going on there that it can be hard to figure out who's who. Drmies (talk) 13:29, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

back and back

Hi there, the pesky IP-hopping BE sock seems to be concentrating on 2023, their activities having been clocked and noted at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/92.14.216.40. As I've confirmed there, it's clearly them. Would you be happy to take action? Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:57, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Mutt Lunker (talk) 08:23, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Forgot this one, thinking it was listed at the investigations page: User:92.5.100.233 Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:15, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
A new user has appeared on the page 2023 which may be worth taking a closer look at. User:202X made their first edits today, deleting [27] a significant amount of hidden wikitext. The wikitext was related to a part of the page, the picture collage, which would only be known to regulars. Carter00000 (talk) 16:44, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Weird. They are not the same person, but they're a perfect match with a sock who has no interest in years. I don't know what to make of it. Drmies (talk) 12:47, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for checking out the account and your information provided above. Perhaps we could just keep an eye on the account for now, as the account doesn't seem have made any further edits or reinstated the edit which I reverted previously. Carter00000 (talk) 13:49, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

User:Gymrat16

Based on various warnings and seeing that a completely new editor went straight to NHL player pages, I have a feeling that User:Gymrat16 is another sockpuppet of User:Moka Mo (link to WP:SPI), but I cannot verify it at the moment, because Editor Interaction Analyser does not work for me. – sbaio 14:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

  • I can see, from their edits, why you would think that, but I checked and geolocate points to a very different place. Any case would have to be made on behavioral grounds. Sorry, Drmies (talk) 14:36, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
    • Drmies, I saw the note you left on Gymrat's note page and followed it here. Another user and myself have encountered Gymrat16 across various NHL-related articles for a two months now. I can't 100% say this is Moka, but there's some unique behavior between the two users, in particular they way they edit section headers and generally refrain leaving edit summaries or communicating with other users. Edits from Moka:[28][29] vs. edits from Gymrat:[30][31]. I'm not sure if this alone is enough evidence to go forward with an SPI case. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  14:59, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Love your neighbor613

They've went full mask off (pun intended). Do you think it's time for a WP:NOTHERE block? LilianaUwU (talk / contribs) 04:07, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Maria de Knuijt

On 15 May 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Maria de Knuijt, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that according to scholarship published in 2023, Maria de Knuijt, rather than her husband, was actually the main patron of Dutch painter Johannes Vermeer (work pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Maria de Knuijt. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Maria de Knuijt), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

-- RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

May songs
my story today

Thank you for your share of the article! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:19, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

LGBT rights in UAE back to the puppet-approved version

Hope it's okay to pester you with this again, Drmies: A user, Felixsto, undid your reversion of the last JacobKennedy sock's work at LGBT rights in the United Arab Emirates. They then went on to make further "improvement": [32]. It seems a straightforward case of quacking to me: What's your view? With thanks, AukusRuckus (talk) 12:22, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

  • Gotcha. Pretty sad, huh. Drmies (talk) 12:32, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
    • Sad, yeah: sigh! (By my estimation they've been acting like this for more than ten years and must be closing-in on 30 years of age, at least. What's the payoff for someone like this? I know, there's even worse around ...) I will post another proforma SPI case like last time. Thanks very much for this, and also for all of your effort on WP. I see it around; it's appreciated. AukusRuckus (talk) 12:48, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

A Cup of Tea for you!

Dinoz1 (chat?) (he/him) has asked you to join them for a nice cup of tea and sit down here.


Thanks for handling Marcela Ocaño at WP:ANI, tea on me! Dinoz1 (chat?) (he/him) 16:15, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

SPI

Hi! I have opened an SPI where you were involved. Feel free to comment if required. – Callmemirela 🍁 22:56, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2023

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2023).

Guideline and policy news

  • Following an RfC, editors indefinitely site-banned by community consensus will now have all rights, including sysop, removed.
  • As a part of the Wikimedia Foundation's IP Masking project, a new policy has been created that governs the access to temporary account IP addresses. An associated FAQ has been created and individual communities can increase the requirements to view temporary account IP addresses.

Technical news

  • Bot operators and tool maintainers should schedule time in the coming months to test and update their tools for the effects of IP masking. IP masking will not be deployed to any content wiki until at least October 2023 and is unlikely to be deployed to the English Wikipedia until some time in 2024.

Arbitration

  • The arbitration case World War II and the history of Jews in Poland has been closed. The topic area of Polish history during World War II (1933-1945) and the history of Jews in Poland is subject to a "reliable source consensus-required" contentious topic restriction.

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:32, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Music genre fixation

Hi, User:AppalachianCentrist seems to have taken it upon himself to classify and label every song, every album and every artist as some genre or other, whether that's the general consensus of music writers and fans or not. Unlike most genre warriors he does cite sources, but he uses them inappropriately, taking one review and labelling the song/album/artist on the basis of one descriptive phrase. For example with REM's New Adventures in Hi-Fi he took one review which said the album rocked "long and hard" as justification for labelling the album "hard rock". I pointed out WP:EXPLICITGENRES to him but that only has essay status. If it was up to me I'd just call REM a "rock" band and leave it at that, but some want to call it "alternative rock" or "college rock", whatever those terms mean. I guess there are a decent number of sources for those terms at least. Anyway his drive by genre-izing is rather exasperating. The Billy Joel album "Glass Houses" is not "punk", the Ramones are not "power pop" etc. One review which is merely trying to describe the music and suggest possible influences is not a basis for labeling something with a genre. This is WP:SYNTH. I've tried explaining this but he won't stop. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 02:20, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

  • Hmm, I see. I just reverted the New Adventures edit: I agree that it's way too tenuous. But this is a matter for talk page discussion, not for administrative intervention. You could try dispute resolution, or an RfC, if you want to focus on this one. You could also take it to ANI, of course, if it's a matter of consistent behavior. Binksternet, do you have an opinion? You've dealt with genre warriors. Oh, fun REM fact: my buddy was an engineer for Up, so I have drank beers with famous people. Drmies (talk) 13:46, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
    • We all know how much fun ANI is, I don't want to do that. He is not a bad faith editor. I just want him to stop calling the Ramones "power pop" and REM "glam rock" and Billy Joel "punk rock". He has done this in multiple articles across multiple genres. Mostly punk (ish), rock and country. And yeah I'm not so much asking you to put on your admin hat so much as someone who knows policy and is fairly knowledgeable about pop/rock music. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 14:03, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
    • I certainly have an opinion! The essay at WP:GWAR represents community consensus, so it has a certain amount of leverage in an argument. Especially the part that calls out WP:V, a hard policy, which can be interpreted as supporting genres named explicitly in sources. (The interpretation would be leaning on letter-of-the-law versus spirit-of-the-law.) The genre-warring behavior of AppalachianCentrist is inappropriate because it appears that AppalachianCentrist is shooting from the hip rather than surveying a broad sweep of the literature to get proper balance. Binksternet (talk) 15:05, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
      • Ha, Binksternet, I knew I could count on you to have an opinion. Max, the path forward, then, is to call out the individual edits, perhaps on talk pages as well as in edit summaries. The better your case is that the genres are unverified or not properly verified the easier it will be to get consensus for individual reverts/edits, and those in turn can be a guide for future reverts. The moment someone explicitly goes against talk page consensus (or policy, of course, for highly unverified edits or clear instances of SYNTH), the easier it will be to report to an admin or a board if it has to go that far. Drmies (talk) 15:28, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
        • He's been doing this for the last three years, cleaning up all the damage he's done to music articles will be a Herculean task. I fixed The Replacements article anyway, they sound more like a sloppier version of the Rolling Stones than a "hardcore punk" band, and the Rolling Stone article he linked to didn't support that characterizaion. Article text also indicates they were not considered a "hardcore" band, except maybe for their first EP. MaxBrowne2 (talk) 09:06, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

IP blocked

Hi @Drmies, I am an Account Creator on this wiki but I just got a message that my IP has been blocked for account creation when I tried creating an account. This is the IP 2401:4900:0:0:0:0:0:0/32. Hope to get help for the same. Thank you. Satdeep Gill (talk • contribs 12:31, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Editor doing the same disruption again and again

Hey Drmies, Tigers5347 kept changing "Kosovo" to "Serbia" or "Kosovo and Metohija" on Šar Mountains and for that got blocked for a month. That happened in 2019. Now the editor has returned to editing and all they are doing is changing "Kosovo" to "Serbia" or "Kosovo and Metohija" on Kosovo Serbs. All their edits in their editing history are the same kind of disruption. Can you take a look as this looks to me as a clear WP:NOTHERE case? Ktrimi991 (talk) 01:05, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done by tps. -- Euryalus (talk) 01:19, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
@Euryalus: thanks, much appreciated. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 10:02, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Oscar James Campbell Jr.

On 8 June 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Oscar James Campbell Jr., which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Oscar James Campbell Jr., an American scholar of Shakespeare, complained in 1926 that PhD students of English had to read "masses of stupid and essentially insignificant material"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Oscar James Campbell, Jr.. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Oscar James Campbell Jr.), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

-- RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Vidz Shingri Joined 9 days ago

Helli, this user is making all Inappropriate edits in many articles and uploading copyright pictures as own. Unaware of Wikipedia guidelines and not referring to talk. Kindly temporary block this user. BrightsForever (talk) 11:08, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Disruptive IP

Hi, you blocked this IP range about a year ago https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3A2603%3A7080%3A5000%3A1F%3A0%3A0%3A0%3A0%2F64 . this person is now using that range to avoid a longterm block of this IP https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/24.59.36.170 could you maybe block the range again? --FMSky (talk) 13:47, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

nice, thanks alot --FMSky (talk) 15:11, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

User Keneris adding back vandalism

Hello, On 30th November 2022, post review your have deleted grossly exaggerated unrelated information. User Keneris is attempting to add the same back BrightsForever (talk) 11:05, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Quote reference & Listicles

Sir, noted many artist articles used Quote & celebrity ranking under Listicles which is apart from Performance awards. How it is unacceptable please let me know? I referred article: Metawin Opas-iamkajorn, which has clean article writting history BrightsForever (talk) 21:26, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Vachirawit Chivaaree as photographer and Philanthropist

Hi Drmies, I understand Bright for only as an actor, however he indeed is popular in Thailand industry for hosting as he started his career from many variety shows. He is popular for his photography and his pictures were part of galleries and in recognized magazines. He is renowned singer and received few awards and multiple nominations. He initiate, involve,promote and publicize charity and is recognised by Thai based organisations.

I understand that there was too much information, I'm learning from your inputs and try to have concise representation in any upcoming edits BrightsForever (talk) 23:35, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

  • I read the article. It's very puffy. We need encyclopedic information based on reliable secondary sources--not celeb stuff based on primary sources and gossip sites. The stuff I removed, that's really for Wikia. Drmies (talk) 00:54, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Uncommunicative IP editor returns

Hey there,

You recently blocked an IP user (following an ANI post by @StarScream1007:). They appear to have returned with a different IP and the same behavior. I noticed familiar behavior by @68.55.207.1: at Steven Stamkos (diff: [33]). I'm pretty new to this (Wikipedia editing, and dealing with such a persistent yet uncommunicative editor), and would appreciate any help or guidance. Thanks! Wracking 💬 02:29, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Drmies, I hope you're well. I wanted to let you know that this editor is back, editing both with their IP(s) and an account (User:Gymrat16). It's hard to keep track of their edits, but they may be edit warring at this point, particularly at Nikita Kucherov. They've responded to notes about their edits, but not changed their behavior. Wracking 💬 03:42, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
OK--this and this clinch it. I warned them too--they're headed for a block if they don't figure it out. Drmies (talk) 12:52, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi again. This is block evasion, no? Thanks for all you do. Wracking 💬 12:29, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Hi again (again). Thanks for your diligence. They now appear to be at IP Special:Contributions/2600:1007:b03c:a189::/64 and Special:Contributions/2601:408:c181:8000::/51 making the same or similar edits.
Example diffs – first IP: [34] [35], second IP: [36] [37]. Thanks! Wracking talk! 22:20, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. What fun. Drmies (talk) 12:19, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

FYI, they are back again. Making similar edits, again (but no longer using the Gymrat16 account). Maybe they're losing steam. Special:Contributions/2600:1007:b0ab:51d8::/64 Wracking talk! 01:00, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Yikes, they don't quit. Pretty much the same pattern as usual. I issued a warning to one IP, and they hopped to another IP. New range: [38]. Thanks again for your help. I owe you soft drink or beer. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  20:16, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Drmies I agree

I got your point, but how it's ok in Metawin Opas-iamkajorn edits, as both artist worked together and some source I picked it from there.

Here problem is there are more writter who adds all articles under Citations, as merged reliable sources into non reliable. It becomes difficult to manage hence 200k file size. I will try to decrease it with whatever I learnt. BrightsForever (talk) 10:02, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Reliable sources

Sir, yesterday you have detailed many reliable sources too like Harper's Bazaar, Elle Magazine and many Thailand based reports & news. He was part UNICEF initiative, you have deleted those too. Hence confused. Understood on the primary sources, but how it is acceptable for other artists who were part of it too, but same source is unreliable here. BrightsForever (talk) 08:36, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

  • Please don't "sir" me: "Drmies" is good enough, thanks. Look, I am going through your recent edits, and "In April 2022, Yoko Kamio expressed her delight in Bright's screen presence..."? That kind of celebrity nonsense is how we get a 200k article on a young entertainer, when Katherine Hepburn, a Featured Article, is 127k, on someone with a six-decade long career. Drmies (talk) 20:44, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
    Im not here to question your judgement but learn. I cannot control all writers who visit the artist page, will not add what you already deleted but learn why it got deleted. BrightsForever (talk) 10:16, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
    With respect to lady Katharine Hepburn hyperlink new pages are created to cover all her work, performance and rewards. As this artist has 10 yrs of experience, no such new separate page is created, hence the page size seems high. As & when he gets more performances, some deletion and addition definitely will happen BrightsForever (talk) 12:34, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
    You did restore material I deleted. I don't understand your point about Hepburn. Yes, there's a separate list of awards and nominations--but there's good reason to do that, since she got awarded, and nominated for, notable honors. Half of the ones on your page are not notable. But my point is really that the Hepburn article doesn't have all the fan stuff about how person X tweeted they liked your artist. I see you've been pruning some content: good. Drmies (talk) 16:02, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Oh. "Acting coach Kru Rambutan Rossukon was impressed by his dedication." Stop the press. Drmies (talk) 20:45, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
    I respect your patience to reply. I am here confused because some similar details got accepted and featured in other artists. Eg: many Chinese artist. BrightsForever (talk) 10:18, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
    So other articles have such details too. I'm sorry, but this is basic encyclopedic stuff: you cannot compare "your" article (you have 656 edits on it) with other poor articles. You should compare with good articles, which is why I mentioned the Hepburn article. Drmies (talk) 15:58, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
    Got it. I appreciate your response. Will refer good articles BrightsForever (talk) 16:17, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
    Yes Article Metawin Opas-iamkajorn have such details too, hence previously I asked you. I referred initially that article as in few initiatives both were present. Other article had clean history so assumed it is acceptable parameters. I will keep your advice in mind. Thanks for response again 🙏🏻 BrightsForever (talk) 16:21, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Oh! He held a guest lecture. He donated to 'Animal Welfare and Shelter'. Oh, he did something sponsored by Astro Stuffs and it was reported on the Astro Stuffs website, where you can "ENJOY YOUR CREATIVITY TO MIX & MATCH WITH OUR TIMELESS, CASUAL, BUT NOT-SO-SIMPLE ITEMS". If you can't see what's wrong with all this, I don't know what to tell you. Drmies (talk) 20:48, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
    Drmies Astro Stuff is his own brand, he's CEO, entrepreneurs of economic clothing line in Thailand, he initiated it. It was not sponsored by someone else & the artist just modelled. To answer few.
    His brand work on sustainability hence he was called to lecture on importance of eco friendly products.
    If his own work is unreliable, let me know where and how it should feature. BrightsForever (talk) 10:13, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
    One should not use the subject's own brand to verify content: it flies in the face of two important guidelines: that we use secondary sources (these are primary, obviously) and that we use neutral, reliable sources (which one cannot expect the subject's own brand site to be). Most importantly, such a source cannot prove that the content is of any encyclopedic value at all; secondary sources do that. Drmies (talk) 15:56, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
    Got your point Drmies, will forever keep this mind BrightsForever (talk) 16:18, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

Need someone who specializes in image use

Over-enthusiastic newbie SacredLotus7 (talk · contribs) has just uploaded a whole bunch of non-free images and added them to Stanley Dorfman. I can't really assess their allowability. Also, the editor has puffed that article up text-wise to where it's possibly a bit de trop. Softlavender (talk) 03:23, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Great photos! I see he is still alive at c. 97, so COI may be suspected. Some look private photos, but who took them? You need a sympathetic expert (not one of the many unsympathetic ones). Johnbod (talk) 03:34, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
All of the editor's contributions have been about Dorfman, so either this is rabid fanship or some form of COI. Softlavender (talk) 03:37, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
I don't know much about images, I'm afraid, but people like Johnbod and others do, fortunately. Have you asked them about a COI? They probably just don't know the rules about disclosure etc., and their photos could be a valuable addition. Drmies (talk) 16:05, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
I think a usertalk COI notice may be in order, but if so I'd rather not be the one to place it. I'm already the only one monitoring the mess he makes, I've AFDed one of his articles and spent endless time fixing the other two. I'm too enmeshed and involved at this time and also don't want to appear bitey. In my mind, it would be better if someone with fresh eyes looked into the situation and determined what course of action to take. My genuine concern is that he is going to keep editing and adding to that Dorfman article until it is an impenetrable shrine and we can't even tell fact from fiction (his citing methods are not the best, and he keeps moving things around and changing text so that many citations probably no longer confirm if they ever did). Softlavender (talk) 03:53, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies/Archive_144&oldid=1164413868"