User talk:Bbb23/Archive 53
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Bbb23. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 50 | Archive 51 | Archive 52 | Archive 53 | Archive 54 | Archive 55 | → | Archive 60 |
Administrators' newsletter – May 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- Discretionary sanctions have been authorized for all pages and edits related to COVID-19, to be logged at WP:GS/COVID19.
- Following a recent discussion on Meta-Wiki, the edit filter maintainer global group has been created.
- A request for comment has been proposed to create a new main page editor usergroup.
- A request for comment has been proposed to make the bureaucrat activity requirements more strict.
Technical news
- The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. You can review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page.
- Enterprisey created a script that will show a link to the proper Special:Undelete page when viewing a since-deleted revision, see User:Enterprisey/link-deleted-revs.
Miscellaneous
- A request for comment closed with consensus to create a Village Pump-style page for communication with the Wikimedia Foundation.
Yet another Evlekis account
Bru14me (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is Evlekis. See this edit linking to an edit on Uncyclopedia made by an impersonation account that had this user page before I edited it... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 10:29, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Bbb23, please come back! Sock dispatched. Favonian (talk) 10:38, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- Nice to see you at the RfA. Please do consider returning especially as SPI is in need of more help right now. --qedk (t 愛 c) 17:03, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Request to restore draft
Hello Bbb23, could you restore a draft of the deleted article, Roberto Stella. There's more recent prominent coverage that I think may strengthen a case for the article. Thanks! TJMSmith (talk) 02:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
- @TJMSmith: Bbb23 is unavailable. Please see the notice at the top of the page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) TJMSmith, per the notice at the top of the page, Bbb23 isn't available. I would suggest that you look at Category:Wikipedia_administrators_willing_to_provide_copies_of_deleted_articles (or, if there are any administrators you've worked with, try asking one of them - since it was an A7 deletion and you have new coverage, that shouldn't be too controversial). creffett (talk) 03:01, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
- @TJMSmith: I will go ahead and userfy it for you. Give me a couple minutes. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:03, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you both! I didn't see the message beforehand. TJMSmith (talk) 03:04, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
- @TJMSmith: I will go ahead and userfy it for you. Give me a couple minutes. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:03, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Known sockpuppet User:JamesOredan back in action
Hello User:Bbb23, this is to inform you that this user is up to their old tricks on the same pages where they caused issues for months until finally identified as serial sockpuppeteer:
User:JamesOredan aka NormanGear banned, and IP address 84.78.247.13/User:Visoredd being used...again:
Page: {{< https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spaniards&action=history}}, {{< https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/84.78.247.113}}
Melroross (talk) 11:26, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aminshahrbanoo/
Since the principal and sockpuppets were blocked, a number of anon editors (namely 2605:E000:244B:BE00:549A:AE54:2A0E:1EC6 and 76.170.151.178) have sought to create the same article that Aminshahrbanoo had created and recreated in the past, namely Draft:Amin shahrbanoo. They have no history of editing any other articles and as such it would appear that this is an attempt by the original editor to get around his block. Dan arndt (talk) 06:02, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
SPA account created this draft of an article that you deleted for G5. I'm not able to see the sock who was banned for it. Thought you might want to take a look and make sure there isn't a connection with the person that created this draft. Cheers Sulfurboy (talk) 04:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
FKC
Hi Bbb23, I noticed that you closed this SPI into FreeKnowledgeCreator (since renamed to Freeknowledgecreator back in 2014. I realise that that is quite a while ago, but your final comment indicated concerns about potential "abusive editing" by this editor. There is currently an extensive ANI thread and at the end of it there are questions about socking. I thought you might be in a position to comment based on your experience in the area. Thanks. EdChem (talk) 09:43, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
- The mentioned ANI thread is now archived to WP:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1038#WP:OWN by Freeknowledgecreator. EdJohnston (talk) 17:23, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Well done
Insert chef kissy-fingers emoji here. This would have been sorted ages ago if not for those meddling kids. You have no idea how many ToeFungii's there are out there right now, gleefully racking up edits, giddy with joy over the chilling effect that letter had on us. -- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 17:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- Ponyo, what letter? Did I miss drama? Guy (help!) 18:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- @JzG: Scroll to the very top of the page.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- Ponyo, oh shit, that letter. I thought it was something from the hosiery drawer. Yes, I am very glad to see Bbb23 with his checkuser boots back on! Guy (help!) 18:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- This is the point in a thread where I expect EEng to step in with an appropriate image and caption like "Bbb23's checkuser boots".-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:26, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- That's totally what I would have done. EEng 20:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- This is the point in a thread where I expect EEng to step in with an appropriate image and caption like "Bbb23's checkuser boots".-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 19:26, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- Ponyo, oh shit, that letter. I thought it was something from the hosiery drawer. Yes, I am very glad to see Bbb23 with his checkuser boots back on! Guy (help!) 18:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- @JzG: Scroll to the very top of the page.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- Glad to see you back, Bbb23. You've been missed! Liz Read! Talk! 21:50, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
- I approve this message.
—PaleoNeonate – 20:25, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
- I approve this message.
- Glad to see you back, Bbb23. You've been missed! Liz Read! Talk! 21:50, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2020).
Administrator changes
CaptainEek • Creffett • Cwmhiraeth
Anna Frodesiak • Buckshot06 • Ronhjones • SQL
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment asks whether the Unblock Ticket Request System (UTRS) should allowed any unblock request or just private appeals.
- The Wikimedia Foundation announced that they will develop a universal code of conduct for all WMF projects. There is an open local discussion regarding the same.
Arbitration
PAKHIGHWAY
Bbb23, can you consider checking logs with relation to on-going SPI at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/PAKHIGHWAY? Asking since you could check earlier too when the case was stale just like it is now.[1] D4iNa4 (talk) 14:02, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
| You have defended the wiki diligently. tenaciously, and persistently over the decades. No bureaucracy will ever delete your illustrious record. The myriads of vanquished socks provide silent testimony of your stellar CU record. Your version of wiki history will persist far beyond any ephemeral bureaucratic capriciousness. Thank you for all you have accomplished and the examples you have set. Dr. K. 07:04, 4 April 2020 (UTC) |
Like. El_C 13:50, 4 April 2020 (UTC)- Like +1 TelosCricket (talk) 18:51, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Like +1 –Davey2010Talk 19:49, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Like +1 Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:33, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
- Like +1 Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 20:10, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
- 20 Mule Team Like +1. MarnetteD|Talk 20:38, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
- Like +1 Softlavender (talk) 01:28, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
- Like +1 DarkKnight2149 17:44, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
- Like +1, Thank for your work for check userWolfch (talk) 04:15, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
- Like +1 --Kzl55 (talk) 19:35, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
- Like +1 - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 23:40, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
- Like +1 - OhNoitsJamie Talk 01:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
- Like +1 - --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 23:54, 31 May 2020 (UTC)`
- Like +1 Chaipau (talk) 11:14, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Moving a SPI to its correct sockmaster
Hi, I have recently filed the SPI against User:Q7887112, suspecting a connection to User:Q788711, but it has been confirmed to be connected to User:PKHilliam instead. Should the SPI be moved to PKHilliam instead of keeping it at Q788711?
Thank you, KevTYD (wake up) 15:34, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
Barnstar
|
The Admin's Barnstar | |
| Hello Bbb23. It's been a while. I don't fully comprehend all the details of recent events, and probably won't, but I do get one thing. Wikipedia is a stressful and complicated place at times, and it's not always smooth sailing. I'd like to say Wikipedia is a better place with all the efforts you put in as an admin. Wishing you all the best for whatever lies ahead. Kind regards, Mar4d (talk) 20:35, 21 May 2020 (UTC) |
Wait what, Bbb is Bbbaaaccckkk??? I am glad that the acute and residual effects of...that situation...have not kept you away permanently. We'd miss your great work! DMacks (talk) 03:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
Same here. I'm not going to pretend I understand everything that's transpired, but I do hope you change your mind and come back. Know your absence is felt. Sro23 (talk) 18:44, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Seamfix
Greetings, I tried to create Seamfix but I realized it had been created by someone else and later deleted by you for advertising or promotion. I wasn't the original creator but I have better information, text and reliable sources to re-create it. Can you help me get it back? Advise me please, thank you MarkCarey911 (talk) 01:20, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Admin's Barnstar |
| That CU was seriously helpful. Those socks were driving me nuts. Thanks. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:39, 10 June 2020 (UTC) |
Welcome back
Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W talk 17:54, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Question about SPI
Is it possible to open a WP:SPI for a series of only IP accounts? Over at Tony Buzbee, there was an IP user 12.11.122.122 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) that frequently would remove well sourced information simply because it painted the subject in a bad light. I noticed that you were actually the admin who blocked this IP. Anyways, some IPv6 accounts are doing the same thing now. If you have time could you please take a look? Bait30 Talk 2 me pls? 04:21, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
Re: Suspected sockpuppet Cocisj455
Good day Bbb23!
I dropped by your talkpage to request for a checkuser on Cocisj455. I have good reason to suspect that the said user is one of many sockpuppets of Albe23413. Like Albe23413, the suspected sockpuppet frequents pages devoted to ABS-CBN shows and its associated list of episodes pages. Hoping for a positive response on this regard. Warmwst regards Gardo Versace (talk) 13:34, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
|
The Admin's Barnstar |
| Bbb23, please don't go. You're one of the most active checkusers on WP, and without you, there'd probably be a tsunami of sock puppets. In my opinion, you do the opposite of violating the CU policy. You vigorously block socks and say {{Checkuser-block-account}}. I cannot imagine what WP would do if you went. 🐔 Chicdat ChickenDatabase 12:24, 19 June 2020 (UTC) |
- Gee, that's very clever, "a tsumani of sock puppets", fits right in with your focus on storms and, uh, chickens. Now, if ArbCom hadn't revoked my privileges, I'd probably have run one of those nasty checks as the mere fact of your leaving me a barnstar screams sock. A little birdie, not a chicken, told me that you were granted some special permissions but then lost them after you rather quickly abused them. Apparently, that gave you special knowledge about the permissions noticeboard so that you now provide helpful little tips to users who request permissions. Kind of you, I'm sure. Of course, there's always the possibility I'm wrong and that you're just a troll rather than a sock. Thanks for the compliments! It's good to be appreciated...by someone.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:08, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
|
The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar |
| I would like to thank you from the bottom of my heart for your long, tireless service as CheckUser and for your work in protecting the English Wikipedia from sockpuppetry. A barnstar is not enough to appreciate your long and hard work. Thank you! JavaHurricane 09:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC) |
- Like +∞ though I don't know the full history. {{reply to|Can I Log In}}'s talk page! 05:19, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
On beverages
If I recall your prefer things such as iced tea and lemonade, but should you want recommendations for stronger options, DoRD would be the one to go to for whiskey, and Ponyo for wine. Ignore the stewards. Other than RadiX none of them have good taste. Anyway, you certainly deserve the beverage of your choice. Ignore the barn star socks. Or just block them. I’m sure Zawl will be by soon enough letting you know how much better you are than me :) TonyBallioni (talk) 06:26, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- For the record, Tony, DoRD also knows wine. —DoRD (talk) 15:31, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- DoRD knows many things :) TonyBallioni (talk) 15:36, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- Well, one thing I know is that a lot of sockmasters are celebrating the Committee's action. I may be tired of the scenery here, but Bbb, I'm really saddened by this whole mess. —DoRD (talk) 15:55, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- DoRD, thanks for your kind words. Now let's turn to Tony's comments about what beverages I like, which is clearly more important than the revocation of my CU privileges. I do not drink anything alcoholic. I do not drink anything with caffeine in it (the reasons for both have nothing to do with religion). Going further, I am, as in most things, a fussy drinker. I drink water, milk, real juice (not from concentrate), and herbal tea. I do not drink soda, punch-type drinks, or decaffeinated coffee. Thank you for your attention to these very important statements.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:29, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- I remember the caffeine now. Don’t know why I forgot in suggesting you like tea. Does lemonade count as a punch? Anyway, I hope you can take some time to de-stress from all this. The work on the CU team can be stressful enough without the added complications of the last few months. Stay well, friend. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:43, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- As long as I'm being chatty this morning, I don't really expect you or anyone else to remember my personal likes and dislikes. If lemonade is made from real lemons, it's not punch, but it's not one of my favorite drinks, mainly because it's very hard to make well. Either it has too much sugar and is therefore too sweet, or it doesn't have enough sugar and is therefore too tart. The trick is using very fresh lemons (like straight from a tree), and unless you're fortunate enough to have access to those, it doesn't work. For a while I was on an extended visit with some friends in southern California, and they had orange trees in their backyard. Every morning, I'd walk out, take some oranges off the trees, return to the kitchen, squeeze the oranges, and drink the juice. Ambrosia.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:58, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ambrosia sounds heavenly compared to the poisonous mix forced upon you by ArbCom. I'd swear more, but it's not Sunday.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:23, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ah, thanks for reminding me, Ponyo, I also don't± drink, at least not voluntarily, hemlock. Please add that to your list, Tony.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:49, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ambrosia sounds heavenly compared to the poisonous mix forced upon you by ArbCom. I'd swear more, but it's not Sunday.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:23, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- As long as I'm being chatty this morning, I don't really expect you or anyone else to remember my personal likes and dislikes. If lemonade is made from real lemons, it's not punch, but it's not one of my favorite drinks, mainly because it's very hard to make well. Either it has too much sugar and is therefore too sweet, or it doesn't have enough sugar and is therefore too tart. The trick is using very fresh lemons (like straight from a tree), and unless you're fortunate enough to have access to those, it doesn't work. For a while I was on an extended visit with some friends in southern California, and they had orange trees in their backyard. Every morning, I'd walk out, take some oranges off the trees, return to the kitchen, squeeze the oranges, and drink the juice. Ambrosia.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:58, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- I remember the caffeine now. Don’t know why I forgot in suggesting you like tea. Does lemonade count as a punch? Anyway, I hope you can take some time to de-stress from all this. The work on the CU team can be stressful enough without the added complications of the last few months. Stay well, friend. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:43, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- DoRD, thanks for your kind words. Now let's turn to Tony's comments about what beverages I like, which is clearly more important than the revocation of my CU privileges. I do not drink anything alcoholic. I do not drink anything with caffeine in it (the reasons for both have nothing to do with religion). Going further, I am, as in most things, a fussy drinker. I drink water, milk, real juice (not from concentrate), and herbal tea. I do not drink soda, punch-type drinks, or decaffeinated coffee. Thank you for your attention to these very important statements.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:29, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- Well, one thing I know is that a lot of sockmasters are celebrating the Committee's action. I may be tired of the scenery here, but Bbb, I'm really saddened by this whole mess. —DoRD (talk) 15:55, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- DoRD knows many things :) TonyBallioni (talk) 15:36, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
This discussion made me Google hemlock (as one does.) Apparently despite being the most poisonous plant in North America, the root of the spotted water hemlock tastes quite pleasant before it kills you. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:33, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
Sa-LUTE! (Hee Haw) from a 45K-edit outsider
I just wanted to tell you that I appreciate all the help you've given me all this time I've been flailing along here, needing SPIs and revdels and such while I've been trapped on interminable unnecessary conference calls. I have no clue whatsoever what your IRL name is, but I made up "Bryan Benjamin Barnes" as your putative name for some reason, and have occasionally addressed you that way out loud to my cats when I'm hyphenating compound modifiers in bed at home to make productive use of insomnia.
I don't know where you live or what you do, but if you find yourself in the U.S. 702 area code coverage area, track me down and I'll buy you a drink, or a plate of nachos, or any other refreshment of your choice. You're a person I like having been able to "know" here and you've got a friend in JDL-land, B3. Thanks. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 00:30, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
- I haven't been responding much to posts to my Talk page, but yours is one of the most original, sweetest, funniest I've seen, even from before my disgrace. Bryan Benjamin Barnes? How ever did you guess? --Bbb23 (talk) 02:22, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
- hahaha! At work at midnight to rectify a crisis and discovering your comment makes me so sadhappy. Augh, I wish I could {hug} you (by which I mean "a literal hug if that would be a comforting thing, but if not, a proffer of an Oreo milkshake from Denny's? or some reasonable facsimile thereof?").
- I actually go IRL by a nickname comprising my first two initials because my birth-certificate name is so infantile and difficult to spell that it's the bane of my existence (and yet, to those who ask, "Why don't you just legally change it?", my response is that why buy trouble?!) I don't remember what prompted, circa 1990, an undergrad classmate's blurt-out of her vague recollection of my real, true-to-life name, but she blithered "Jodessa Dalmatia" on the fly, and it's only maybe 10 percent sillier than the actual truth.
- Augh, B^3-23, please stay, and/or come back someday. You are, in this weird bureaucratic nameless universe, truly cherished (even non-Wikipedians Alphadeltafoxtrot and feline Mischa Barton know that!). Hang in there, pal. You have a friend in a pointy Western state. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 07:29, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- What lovely comments! I certainly agree with the one above. Please keep editing, we need you. Doug Weller talk 09:03, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- Me too. I don't know Bbb all that well, but for what I do know, he's an awesome checkuser and admin. Also, 1060 watchers is a huge deal. We will miss you, Bbb23 :( ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 18:44, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- What lovely comments! I certainly agree with the one above. Please keep editing, we need you. Doug Weller talk 09:03, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| I would like to request to give access to one of my editing about a living person Abdulla Shareef, actor from maldives since i have written a new series information Sihun Web Series and casting details i cannot add due to the protection made from this account to the IP, kindly grant the access to this IP. Thank you Mvblogger (talk) 06:24, 29 June 2020 (UTC) |
A salute for you!
.svg)
|
WikiSalute |
| ArbCom has made a major mistake, and Wikipedia will never be the same without you. I salute you, Bryan Benjamin Barnes the 23rd, for all you've done to protect Wikipedia from the many vandals, spammers, and the like that refused to go away. - ZLEA T\C 19:16, 26 June 2020 (UTC) |
+1 more who misses your diligence. Atsme Talk 📧 21:30, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
- CU won't be the same without you. --Saqib (talk) 16:32, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is in progress to remove the T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) speedy deletion criterion.
Technical news
- Protection templates on mainspace pages are now automatically added by User:MusikBot II (BRFA).
Arbitration
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an
RfC regarding on-wiki harassment
. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community. - The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for
all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles
.
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an
ArbCom and me
ArbCom has informed me that I am using my CU privileges in ways that violate policy. They have ordered me to limit my checking to "non-discretionary" cases (not easy to define). They have warned me that if I check in a manner that they deem violates policy, my CU privileges will be removed without further warning.
I disagree with ArbCom's decision, but there's zero I can do about it. Nonetheless, I do not want to work for an organization that (1) hamstrings my ability to prevent disruption caused by socking, (2) micromanages my actions, and (3) is unappreciative of my CU work. For these reasons, I am leaving the project. I'm angry and upset at the moment, so I won't categorically say I will never return, but I don't plan on it.
Best wishes to all who do good work here. I will not be responding to messages posted to my Talk page. --Bbb23 (talk) 22:07, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
- I hope you change your mind, Bbb23. You are the Checkuser I turn to whenever I have questions. I hope you return. Liz Read! Talk! 01:36, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- User:Bbb23, I continue to be impressed by your work, and wish you would stay. The political issues with being a checkuser must be tricky and hard to evaluate. Not every case will be clearcut. But you probably knew that! EdJohnston (talk) 01:54, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- I simply did not need this terrible news in the midst of this crisis. Bbb23, I hope you reevaluate your departure and you come back asap. Thank you for the excellent CU work you have done on all the SPIs through the years, and especially the many times you helped me in the SPIs I had opened. Thank you also for all the socks your CU pixie dust tool stopped in their tracks. Take care and stay safe. Dr. K. 02:40, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- You are one of the best and most valuable admins that the project has. I certainly understand your reasons for leaving and I will be among the many who will be glad if you return. But absolutely do what is best for you. My very best wishes to you and yours and I hope that you stay safe and well. MarnetteD|Talk 02:50, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- It's hard to believe anything as crazy as this dated April 1. Message from Arbcom to community: we don't care, socks are not our problem. It's painful to think that Arbcom has accomplished what trolls have been trying to achieve for years. Johnuniq (talk) 03:05, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- what What WHAT??? This is indeed a disturbing and sad turn of events. Thanks for all you have done here! DMacks (talk) 05:07, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- WHAT?!? No one may unreplacable, but in this case... Is there anything we can do to object toArbCom? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:30, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- That's just terrible. You're a fine editor and a mainstay of WP:SPI. Another fine fumble for ArbCom! Favonian (talk) 10:58, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- ArbCom, wtf? Bbb23, please take the time, but we need you back. Without people like you, very likely exactly you, we'll have NOTHERE's laughing at our faces while we wait for the SPI backlog to never clear. Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:33, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- This seems crazy to me, particularly having read Tony Ballioni's comments at the Arbcom Noticeboard. Diff -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 14:08, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Great, there goes the neighbourhood. Not ArbCom's finest move. Yunshui 雲水 14:37, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- I fully agree with Roxy, after having read Tony Ballioni's comments. This is an overreach. You do outstanding work. I do not see how one or two small incidents (I do not know the details of course) can derail a long-stranding admin with quality work. Take a break if you must, then come back. We need good work, not micromanagement. -- Alexf(talk) 15:44, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Well, fuck. That is about as pointless as bureaucracy gets around here. Guy (help!) 16:05, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Bbb23, I am saddened by this news. Extending my best wishes to you and yours in these unprecedented times, El_C 16:44, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- ArbCom seems determined to get rid of our best admins. Please come back soon. Softlavender (talk) 17:00, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Very sorry to hear it. I hope you do return. I, along with others, appreciate your work as a CU. Crossroads -talk- 18:48, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Peace, Bbb. If and when you do ever feel like returning you'll be more than welcome by a large majority of those aware of your work here. And thank you for making transparent what ArbCom intended to be "a private advisory note to" or "a quiet word with" you, according to some of the committee's members. ---Sluzzelin talk 19:34, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry to hear that Bbb23. You do very fine work. I hope you will reconsider, and come back please! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:19, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- I'm extremely saddened to see this, You were beyond amazing with the CU work you did and I truly mean that, You're a fantastic admin and a fantastic editor too, I hope one day you'll return but in the meantime I wish you all the very best, Thank you for your CU work and admin work across the project, Take care, Dave /// –Davey2010Talk 23:21, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Upsetting to hear. Sorry to lose you, Bbb23, you always did great work from my perspective. Editors are valued assets. They devote shitloads of time for free. They rarely even require expressions of appreciation. Vandals, sock operators, undisclosed paid editing rings, shady marketing and PR firms, etc., all needlessly suck hours and hours out of the lives of these valuable assets with their vampiric trespassing. Wikipedia needs to either come up with automated ways to identify potential disruptive users to justify CU checks so that regular editors don't, or give CUs some extra leeway. The vampires are thieves. That's my emotional complaint having not read the ArbCom stuff. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:46, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
- Sigh. Good job ArbCom.</sarcasm> You'll be missed. I hope to see you back. --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:33, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
- I always knew that Wikipedia was messed up right at the top, but this just confirms it when a skilled admin like Bbb23 is forced out. Wikipedia is going to be so much more messed up now and worse off. This feels like someone is leaving the gates open for all the trolls to invade. Govvy (talk) 06:56, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for all of your contributions to the project Bbb23. I hope to see you around in the future. -- LuK3 (Talk) 16:59, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
- Your CU work was indispensable and will be sorely missed. Better to retire before the Committee summarily takes any tools away from you - which is their new approach. Do whatever you think is right to demonstrate your dissatisfaction with the way this Committee is now policing the project, I won't beg you to come back but I thank you heartily for all the time and experience you have thanklessly devoted to tracking trolls and banishing other miscreants. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:19, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Terribly unfortunate. I hope one day you may choose to come back, but regardless if you do or do not, all the work you've done so far is much appreciated indeed. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:01, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for all you did for the project. I personally quite liked you, and I hope you do come back. I hope ArbCom re-thinks their position. TelosCricket (talk) 18:53, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- Ridiculous. Many thanks for all the work you've done for Wikipedia. The manual checkuser process is already suboptimal and your work was of incredible value.
At current time it's difficult for me to judge on if the complaint had any legitimacy. The result is, nevertheless, technical disruption, unless you keep on. While we allow arbcom a lot of trust in general, as a computer-science person I don't think their role assumes any technical competency in the field (it is dubious that they could micromanage you or even properly analyse the relevant history themselves internally).Wikipedia:CheckUser#Grounds for checking does allow legitimate use of fair judgement, and I'm sure that most of your actions protected the project. —PaleoNeonate – 19:44, 5 April 2020 (UTC)- I have striked some of my comment that I considered out of touch after reading this. There does not seem to be a reason for a case about CU or admin status at current time (and CUs appear divided on a few points themselves). I still hope you consider donating your precious time, that as you know from the above, is highly appreciated. Thanks again, —PaleoNeonate – 23:36, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
- My god!! You are by far one of the very best CheckUsers we have, and I want to know what idiot on ArbCom is responsible for this outrage. Of course, I respect whatever choice you make regarding your CU status, but I do want you to know that at least some of us find the warning by ArbCom to be asinine in the extreme -- and I'm not a perennial ArbCom-basher. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:47, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
- I hope this limit fades away at some point. You are a very productive member of this encyclopedia. I'm not sure what caused this ruling, but just from my past interactions and observations, this will probably do more harm to Wikipedia than good. It would be a shame to lose you forever. DarkKnight2149 06:21, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
- I'm very sorry to hear about the situation. Thanks for everything you've done for the project as a valuable contributor and administrator. The door is always open for you to return, so you can always come back if you feel like it. I would like to wish you the best of luck. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:45, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I only just picked-up on this news. I want to sincerely thank you for all your help over the years. I do hope that this silly situation is stopped and resolved. We want you back and will miss your advice. Best regards, David, David J Johnson (talk) 10:37, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- Damn. Here I am coming to you because I have CU question and your gone. Perhaps forever. This is most unfortunate news, and it couldn't have come at a worse time. Also, what the hell was arbcom thinking? TomStar81 (Talk) 13:51, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- This is a loss to the English Wikipedia no doubt. Just know that many appreciate all the tireless, thankless work you've done to improve this place over the years. Please reconsider and come back when you can Bbb23. --Kzl55 (talk) 19:34, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
- I have no idea how I missed this until now. It is a huge, huge loss to Wikipedia. Thank you for all your invaluable help over the years. I hope you will reconsider, but your personal well-being is obviously a lot more important than any website. --bonadea contributions talk 12:04, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- Not happy about this at all. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 23:37, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
- You have solved problems with CU so many times. A gigantic net positive.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:41, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for all the work you've done for Wikipedia. —PaleoNeonate – 02:06, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- Brace your self for the barrage of socks and paid editors waiting to flood WP and good luck trying to replace a diligent worrier like Bbb23. As Yunshui said there goes the neighborhood . Thank you Bbb23 for all the work put in. - FitIndia Talk Admin on Commons 12:53, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- Wiki community eats another of its young. Why does this help?Eschoryii (talk) 22:25, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
I completely disagree with ArbCom. If i had abilities to change your CheckUser rights, i definitely will re enable this right because it makes no sense that you have abused CheckUser. You are the best CheckUser ever on wikipedia. User3749 (talk) 16:05, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Revocation of CheckUser access for Bbb23
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:
In April, the Arbitration Committee privately warned Bbb23 (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) that his use of the CheckUser tool had been contrary to local and global policies prohibiting checking accounts where there is insufficient evidence to suspect abusive sockpuppetry ("fishing"). The committee additionally imposed specific restrictions on Bbb23's use of the CheckUser tool in ambiguous cases otherwise considered to be within the discretion of individual CheckUsers. Bbb23 has subsequently communicated to the committee that he is unwilling to comply with these restrictions, continued to run similar questionable checks, and refused to explain these checks on request. Accordingly, Bbb23's CheckUser access is revoked.
- Support: Joe Roe, Bradv, Beeblebrox, Maxim, David Fuchs, xeno, Worm That Turned, SoWhy, Casliber, Newyorkbrad, DGG
- Oppose:
- Recuse: KrakatoaKatie
- Inactive: GorillaWarfare, Mkdw
For the Arbitration Committee, – Joe (talk) 06:23, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
- Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Revocation of CheckUser access for Bbb23
- Bbb23: I hope that you will read this as some point in the future. On behalf of everyone in the Wikipedia community who feels as I do, that you were without a doubt the very best CU that we've ever had, I wish to apologize for ArbCom's decision, which I found to be unnecessarily authoritarian, almost inexplicable, and antithetical to the spirit of Wikipedia. Best of luck to you, and I hope we'll see you back in action whenever you're ready to return. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:03, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
- seriously! the fuck! Whats wrong with wikipedia?! I just found out about this. I dont know anything about the Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Revocation of CheckUser access for Bbb23; but I read the thread at the top of your page. I can understand what it is about. Simply put: I dont believe you you overused the tools in bad way. You have tons of experience, and a good judgement rearding socking. I can never imagine you fishing randomly. But please dont leave the project bbb. I hope you stay around. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:52, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
- I hate ArbCom if they disabled your right. If i had permission to re enable your CheckUser rights, i definitely will since that"s nonsense because you DID NOT EVEN VIOLATE A SINGLE rule. User3749 (talk) 16:12, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Sorry to see you go
Although I've never had this happen to me, I can say that I can only imagine how hurtful, angering, embarrassing, and devastating losing an advanced user right would feel. I'm sorry that it happened. I know that you're retired, but I hope that it's only temporary and that when things calm down, you find yourself back along side us. I will miss you. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 07:53, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
- So sad. --Titodutta (talk) 20:07, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
- Just want to echo this. I have only just discovered you have retired. I am not familiar with the circumstances that led to this but I will say I was always slightly relieved when you turned up on a case I filed; I knew it would at least get a fair hearing even if not the outcome I desired. Personally I think Wikipedia needs more admins like you, not fewer. I don't see any winners here. Betty Logan (talk) 23:28, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
- You will be missed. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:48, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- This is rather disappointing. I wish you well in retirement. Fiddle Faddle 16:14, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- :( The creeper2007Talk! Be well, stay safe 11:32, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – August 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2020).
Administrator changes
Oversight changes
Guideline and policy news
- There is an open request for comment to decide whether to increase the minimum duration a sanction discussion has to remain open (currently 24 hours).
- Speedy deletion criterion T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) has been repealed following a request for comment.
- Speedy deletion criterion X2 (pages created by the content translation tool) has been repealed following a discussion.
- There is a proposal to restrict proposed deletion to confirmed users.
Notice of ANI that mentions you in passing
Greetings, FYI I filed a request at WP:ANI titled "CIR-based community-imposed site ban re: RTG". In providing a basis for my request I mentioned you and your prior dealings with this editor. Your input at ANI is optional, i.e., invited but not specifically requested. Thanks for reading. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 12:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Will miss you dude
I've only just found out of your leaving, I will miss you and will miss the opportunity to bombard you with CU requests with regard to a certain user... (lol). Rest easy and hope to see you back soon. Have a beer on me. Nightfury 14:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Stay?
Why should you stay after such shabby treatment. A few people in a current position of power make people "retire" in the only way left for them to react. A history of contributions is ignored. My two cents. Eschoryii (talk) 21:42, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
- What does the sorry to see you go messages accomplish? There is no mechanism to reverse Wiki decisions by editors who support someone and see a loss to the project.Eschoryii (talk) 12:26, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
- An expression of appreciation, —PaleoNeonate – 06:43, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Singapore)
I believe that there was a page titled 'Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Singapore)' that was deleted. Could you revert your deletion? Thanks. Gandalfett (talk) 07:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gandalfett: Hi. Bbb23 has retired. But maybe TonyBallioni can help you, as he is a CU as well. —usernamekiran (talk) 08:38, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Gandalfett: Hi thanks for the referral. Gandalfett (talk) 08:41, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – September 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2020).
Administrator changes
CheckUser changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, the minimum length for site ban discussions was increased to 72 hours, up from 24.
- A request for comment is ongoing to determine whether paid editors
must
orshould
use the articles for creation process. - A request for comment is open to resolve inconsistencies between the draftification and alternative to deletion processes.
Arbitration
- A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2020 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.
- An open request for comment asks whether active Arbitrators may serve on the Trust and Safety Case Review Committee or Ombudsman commission.
Administrators' newsletter – September 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2020).
Administrator changes
- Ajpolino • LuK3
Jackmcbarn- Ad Orientem • Harej • Lid • Lomn • Mentoz86 • Oliver Pereira • XJaM
There'sNoTime → TheresNoTime
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment found consensus that incubation as an alternative to deletion should generally only be recommended when draftification is appropriate, namely
1) if the result of a deletion discussion is to draftify; or 2) if the article is newly created
.
- A request for comment found consensus that incubation as an alternative to deletion should generally only be recommended when draftification is appropriate, namely
Technical news
- The filter log now provides links to view diffs of deleted revisions (phab:T261630).
Arbitration
- The 2020 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place from September 27th to October 7th.
- Following a request for comment, sitting Committee members may not serve on either the Ombuds Commission or the WMF Case Review Committee. The Arbitration Committee passed a motion implementing those results into their procedures.
Miscellaneous
- The Universal Code of Conduct draft is open for community review and comment until October 6th, 2020.
- Office actions may now be appealed to the Interim Trust & Safety Case Review Committee.
Administrators' newsletter – November 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection
any article on a beauty pageant, or biography of a person known as a beauty pageant contestant, which has been edited by a sockpuppet account or logged-out sockpuppet
, to be logged at WP:GS/PAGEANT.
- Community sanctions now authorize administrators to place under indefinite semiprotection
Technical news
- Sysops will once again be able to view the deleted history of JS/CSS pages; this was restricted to interface administrators when that group was introduced.
- Twinkle's block module now includes the ability to note the specific case when applying a discretionary sanctions block and/or template.
- Sysops will be able to use Special:CreateLocalAccount to create a local account for a global user that is prevented from auto-creation locally (such as by a filter or range block). Administrators that are not sure if such a creation is appropriate should contact a checkuser.
Arbitration
- The 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections process has begun. Eligible editors will be able to nominate themselves as candidates from November 8 through November 17. The voting period will run from November 23 through December 6.
- The Anti-harassment RfC has concluded with a summary of the feedback provided.
Miscellaneous
- A reminder that
standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people.
(American Politics 2 Arbitration case).
- A reminder that
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message
| | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Administrators' newsletter – December 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2020).
Administrator changes
- Andrwsc • Anetode • GoldenRing • JzG • LinguistAtLarge • Nehrams2020
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- There is a request for comment in progress to either remove T3 (duplicated and hardcoded instances) as a speedy deletion criterion or eliminate its seven-day waiting period.
Technical news
- Voting for proposals in the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey, which determines what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year, will take place from 8 December through 21 December. In particular, there are sections regarding administrators and anti-harassment.
Arbitration
- Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 7 December 2020 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.
Administrators' newsletter – January 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Speedy deletion criterion T3 (duplication and hardcoded instances) has been repealed following a request for comment.
Technical news
- You can now put pages on your watchlist for a limited period of time.
Arbitration
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
for all pages relating to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes)
. The effectiveness of the discretionary sanctions can be evaluated on the request by any editor after March 1, 2021 (or sooner if for a good reason). - Following the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Barkeep49, BDD, Bradv, CaptainEek, L235, Maxim, Primefac.
- By motion, standard discretionary sanctions have been temporarily authorized
Regarding Master Plot
I just saw you redacted the plot of the film master that i wrote this afternoon, I just wanted to inform you that the entire plot(in its original form) was completely written by me on me own effort, The website that you cited seems to have copied the plot from wiki, Not the other way around, I was a bit shocked to see original content from wiki being removed as duplicate, Hope it was a mistake.
I have added my plot back and request that you confirm that it original if you wish, And also suggest looking at other articles from that website if you wish(They seem to be copying plots from wiki and pasting it as movie plots in their website)
Like this plot which was copied by them here.
You seem to be retired from editing, I'm only leaving this message to notify you of the revert in good faith, You may archive this message if you please :) -- KindCowboy69 ☮ 15:23, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
- KindCowboy69, I support this user. Though it cannot directly be proven, these websites have a tendancy for plagiarising from us. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:33, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
2021
 |
Have a good new year! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:40, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – February 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2021).
|
|
|
Arbitration
- The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover
post-1992 politics of United States and closely related people
, replacing the 1932 cutoff.
- The standard discretionary sanctions authorized for American Politics were amended by motion to cover
Miscellaneous
- Voting in the 2021 Steward elections will begin on 05 February 2021, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 26 February 2021, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
- Wikipedia has now been around for 20 years, and recently saw its billionth edit!
Sandy Saha Article creation Help
Hello, i wanna create an article name Sandy Saha. I saw you have deleted the page on 8 April 2019. Now I need your permission to create the page. So can I get your permission ?? If you will give me permission then I can edit the article. Jroynoplan (talk) 21:20, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – March 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2021).
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is open that proposes a process for the community to revoke administrative permissions. This follows a 2019 RfC in favor of creating one such a policy.
- A request for comment is in progress to remove F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a, which covers immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
- A request for comment seeks to grant page movers the
delete-redirectuserright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target. The full proposal is at Wikipedia:Page mover/delete-redirect. - A request for comment asks if sysops may
place the General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019 editnotice template on pages in scope that do not have page-specific sanctions
? - There is a discussion in progress concerning automatic protection of each day's featured article with Pending Changes protection.
Technical news
- When blocking an IPv6 address with Twinkle, there is now a checkbox with the option to just block the /64 range. When doing so, you can still leave a block template on the initial, single IP address' talkpage.
- When protecting a page with Twinkle, you can now add a note if doing so was in response to a request at WP:RfPP, and even link to the specific revision.
- There have been a number of reported issues with Pending Changes. Most problems setting protection appear to have been resolved (phab:T273317) but other issues with autoaccepting edits persist (phab:T275322).
Arbitration
- By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions
authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, any gender-related dispute or controversy and associated people.
Sanctions issued under GamerGate are now considered Gender and sexuality sanctions. - The Kurds and Kurdistan case was closed, authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for
the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed
.
- By motion, the discretionary sanctions originally authorized under the GamerGate case are now authorized under a new Gender and sexuality case, with sanctions
Miscellaneous
- Following the 2021 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: AmandaNP, Operator873, Stanglavine, Teles, and Wiki13.
Administrators' newsletter – April 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2021).
Administrator changes
- Alexandria • Happyme22 • RexxS
Guideline and policy news
- Following a request for comment, F7 (invalid fair-use claim) subcriterion a has been deprecated; it covered immediate deletion of non-free media with invalid fair-use tags.
- Following a request for comment, page movers were granted the
delete-redirectuserright, which allows moving a page over a single-revision redirect, regardless of that redirect's target.
Technical news
- When you move a page that many editors have on their watchlist the history can be split and it might also not be possible to move it again for a while. This is because of a job queue problem. (T278350)
- Code to support some very old web browsers is being removed. This could cause issues in those browsers. (T277803)
Arbitration
- A community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure is open until April 25.
stroll
 | |
| wild garlic |
|---|
On this day in 1742, He was despised was performed for the first time, and when I wrote it in 2012, I didn't only think of Jesus. Andreas Scholl sang that for us, - you are invited to a Baroque stroll. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:20, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Checkuser Block from way back when
Can you please check out This discussion. This was a CU block you enacted back in 2018, and we cannot undo a CU block without your blessing. The discussion consensus is pretty clearly to unblock per WP:ROPE, but given that it's a CU block, you would have to also give your blessing. Can you either a) do the unblock or b) contribute to the discussion and let us know yea or nay on the unblock. Thanks. --Jayron32 14:54, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Skews Peas
User:Skews Peas was found to have been blocked as a sock. See User talk:Brogo13 WhisperToMe (talk) 19:25, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, I know. I knew he was a sock, but I didn't know who the master was (the SPI was begun after my departure). Thanks should go to Blablubbs, the clerk who spotted it, and to Mz7, the CU who confirmed SP and a few others.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:58, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – May 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2021).
Administrator changes
Interface administrator changes
Guideline and policy news
- Following an RfC, consensus was found that third party appeals are allowed but discouraged.
- The 2021 Desysop Policy RfC was closed with no consensus. Consensus was found in a previous RfC for a community based desysop procedure, though the procedure proposed in the 2021 RfC did not gain consensus.
Technical news
- The user group
oversightwill be renamed tosuppress. This is for technical reasons. You can comment at T112147 if you have objections.
- The user group
Arbitration
- The community consultation on the Arbitration Committee discretionary sanctions procedure was closed, and an initial draft based on feedback from the now closed consultation is expected to be released in early June to early July for community review.
Quick request
Thanks for the prompt deletion of User:Dr Sudipto Roy (Politician). Would you mind deleting the corresponding user talk page as well? I know user talk pages are not usually deleted, but it's appropriate in this case as there is nothing to preserve in the history. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 00:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Done --Bbb23 (talk) 00:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Xiangqi555 (talk · contribs) is Solider789 (talk · contribs)
He's back Bumbubookworm (talk) 01:15, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) blocked 5 albert square (talk) 02:08, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- And tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:18, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks folks Bumbubookworm (talk) 02:26, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Unlock Raj Kishor Yadav
Hello, I think you protected Raj Kishor Yadav from creation by mistake or may be by wrong citations, etc. He is member of parliament of Nepal. Could you please unlock the page so that it can created. Regards! nirmal (talk) 07:59, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- The Yadav repeatedly created years ago was an Indian kid. I've changed the protection on the name so autoconfirmed users can create it.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:01, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Reverting edits by blocked ip
Is it okay for me to revert the edits by 117.204.161.128 on Bianna Golodryga or will I get blocked on wp:3rr ? Here's the reference Thanks! Interesting Geek (talk) 23:36, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Interesting Geek: I see no problem with your reverting the IP. You've effectively only reverted once (3 consecutive edits).--Bbb23 (talk) 23:56, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
Phil De Luna
Hi Bbb23! I see you deleted this article after another editor moved it to draft space. I am wondering if you can explain what I should do next? I am not sure how draft space works.
I was also curious if there is a portal to look for experienced editors or administrators to mentor with a first article? Thanks! Greenbound (talk) 01:18, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Greenbound: I vaguely recall the article, but I don't believe I deleted it. If you want feedback from more experienced editors on the draft, submit it through WP:AFC.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:32, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
- Oops, I'm wrong. I did delete it. An editor had created a redirect to the draft and requested deletion, and I did so.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:45, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Nice surprise
It was a pleasant surprise to see your name in a few places when I logged on today after a few weeks off. Looks like you're back to being more active than I am for now. Always good to see you around, Bbb. TonyBallioni (talk) 18:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
- @TonyBallioni: It feels a bit strange to be editing Wikipedia as much as I have lately, both because of the long period of inactivity and the feeling like one of my Wikipedia limbs was amputated. I've noticed your sporadic editing. I hope your time away is pleasant and not just the demands of your professional life.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:12, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
- I certainly understand where you're coming from. My life is good. Professional life is less busy than it was the last few months, but also figured that Wikipedia could get on well without me while I focused on some other personal projects. I'll probably be back to editing more frequently now, but basically only want to do SPI/OS stuff and some content. The internal policy stuff is tiring. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
- Heh, "personal projects" sounds good. Do we have policies? :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 18:00, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
- I certainly understand where you're coming from. My life is good. Professional life is less busy than it was the last few months, but also figured that Wikipedia could get on well without me while I focused on some other personal projects. I'll probably be back to editing more frequently now, but basically only want to do SPI/OS stuff and some content. The internal policy stuff is tiring. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
- @TonyBallioni: As long as we're chatting, don't you think Blablubbs should be promoted to full clerk? I've been fairly impressed with them.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:36, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
- Good point. I was planning on looking more at that later this week and send the traditional email to the list! TonyBallioni (talk) 20:42, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
UK Cyber Security Council
Hello Bbb23 - apologies, I'm fairly new here, I saw you deleted the website link on the [[2]] entry. Is there any way to get this back up? The actual link is https://www.ukcybersecuritycouncil.org.uk/. Many thanks. --Raxraxrax (talk) 14:47, 24 May 2021 (UTC)Raxraxrax
- Done --Bbb23 (talk) 15:24, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, I realized after hastily AFDing it that it was an actual hoax. YODADICAE👽 14:03, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- No problem. I'm looking at other creations of this user, and I'm close to blocking them, but it'll take a little more time.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:05, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, as I noted on their talk page, I have some serious concerns. This isn't the normal drive-by spam creation, it was elaborate and they took what could only be a significant amount of time to set up more than 30 fake sources - in that they don't exist, not even unreliable source and then format them to make them look legit. YODADICAE👽 14:07, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- Yup, the deception was indeed elaborate. I went through all their page creations, and although a few were not hoaxes, I deleted seven that were. I have indeffed the user.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:35, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, as I noted on their talk page, I have some serious concerns. This isn't the normal drive-by spam creation, it was elaborate and they took what could only be a significant amount of time to set up more than 30 fake sources - in that they don't exist, not even unreliable source and then format them to make them look legit. YODADICAE👽 14:07, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Why did you revert my edit?
I removed inaccurate information. Why did you revert my edit at Aeon? HappyMouse2 (talk) 17:47, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- You removed a section, part of which was sourced, and without explanation.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:50, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- I just looked at the sentence in the section that was not sourced. Based on the wikilinks, it looks verifiable to me, although it should have a source. I also looked at the history of the article, and that section, unchanged, has been in the article for years. Although that in and of itself doesn't mean it should remain, it does make it more surprising that you should choose to delete it because you believe, without support, that the material is "inaccurate".--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
TPA
Hi Bbb23. Could you please revoke talk page access for Catcha Asef? They've repeated posted article-like content on their talk page since you blocked them. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:47, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- Done --Bbb23 (talk) 05:50, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Fyi
Not sure what this is about, but thought you might want to know someone out there is apparently not happy. - jc37 10:26, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) This one could probably do with a short rangeblock. The assigned CIDR block is , but it looks like might do the trick just as well. --Blablubbs|talk 12:13, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Jc37 and Blablubbs: I blocked the /16 range for 72 hours. It includes a little more disruption than the /17 range and with no collateral damage that I can see. One of the IPs in the range was already blocked, and the range was CU-blocked by ST47 for 3 months in 2020. Thanks! --Bbb23 (talk) 13:43, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Bbb23, can I draw your attention to User:Bobby690 who you recently blocked for edit warring. Their second edit after returning from the block was to resume the edit war on the same article... Thanks, Laplorfill (talk) 15:25, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- I would like to state that the other editor had already reverted my edit before i did anything Bobby690 (talk) 15:47, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Laplorfill: As you already know, I've blocked Bobby for one week. I screwed up with the other user and thought they too had restored their version since their block expired. I was misled by Bobby's comment and by a misreading of the article's history. So, I blocked them too but then realized what I'd done, unblocked them, and apologized. It really would be nice if the issue of the alias could be worked out.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Bbb23: many thanks for the prompt action. I'll see if I can generate a consensus on the talk page. Best, Laplorfill (talk) 16:19, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Atma Global
Hola. FWIW, Atma Global (I nommed for G7, you declined) didn't actually win a Stevie at all! I'll AfD 'em now. Just thought I'd mention it! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:04, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- Struck that, found the 'Stevie' at the bottom of the list. Still going to AfD with them, sorry to have wasted your eyeballs with the pointless comments! Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:21, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- I did verify that they had won the Stevie before I declined. Your comments aren't "pointless"; nice of you to let me know about the AfD.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:35, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello
Can you please have a look at this, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vellinakshatram (2004 film). The nomination is closed as a speedy keep without even a single keep vote. Which was nominated on 22nd of this month. And closed as Keep today. Regards, Powerful Karma (talk) 13:08, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- I've told the closer to revert, and I'll watch to make sure they do. Next time, though, please talk to the closer first before coming to an administrator.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:13, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- I'm sorry for disturbing you. Actually I posted the same on Celestina007s' talk page. And the closer replied in a bad manner. BTW thank you. Regards, Powerful Karma (talk) 13:20, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- But you should have gone to the closer first, not Celestina007 and then me. I've commented at Celestina's Talk page. I must say, though, on a substantive level, your nomination at best seems misguided. Finally, please don't use mobile diffs, at least not with me.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:37, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- I'm sorry for disturbing you. Actually I posted the same on Celestina007s' talk page. And the closer replied in a bad manner. BTW thank you. Regards, Powerful Karma (talk) 13:20, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Sucker for All / Serolss / IPs SPI
Hey there, do I have to do a separate SPI for the new IP that's clearly the same as the IP you just blocked for being a duck of Serolss? Whether this or either IP is SFA should be one thing, but this 2600... is clearly 67... whether SFA also is or not. Thanks! JesseRafe (talk) 19:28, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- There is nothing for you to do; please don't open a new SPI. I've blocked the new IP.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:13, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Welcome back
Hey, I'm really glad to see you around again. Best, --MarioGom (talk) 15:32, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- I agree. Good to see you helping out. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:39, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- Me too. It did my heart good to see your name on my watchlist again. Thanks for all you do. MarnetteD|Talk 15:50, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks everyone.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:12, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- Ditto the three above EvergreenFir (talk) 23:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- I'll throw my name in too :) Betty Logan (talk) 02:51, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
- Ditto the three above EvergreenFir (talk) 23:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks everyone.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:12, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
- Me too. It did my heart good to see your name on my watchlist again. Thanks for all you do. MarnetteD|Talk 15:50, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Obvious sockpuppetry
- Hk12hk (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Dhakathecity (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Tools: Editor interaction utility
Greetings. These two new accounts are definitely operated by one user. I tried to report them to Ymblanter, but he cannot do anything now. If you check Dhaka's edit history, recently, a new account (Hk12hk) disrupted the article, and when I reverted the obvious vandalism, within hours, the sockmaster created another account (Dhakathecity) to revert me, and then, as I think you just saw, the sock "reported" me to admins for no reason. Please see their edit history. Best wishes. Danloud (talk) 18:30, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Danloud: I think it would be better for you to file a report at WP:SPI. I understand why you think the two users are socks, but with so few edits it's not as clear to me. For that reason, if you file a report, I would request a CU to confirm.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:09, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Bbb23: I filed a report. - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hk12hk Danloud (talk) 20:42, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
- Good. I added a CU request. (You don't need to ping me on my own Talk page.) --Bbb23 (talk) 20:47, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
A beer for you!
|
Thank you for blocking the Young Knight. I found him really disturbing. 🤪 🐍Helen🐍 17:10, 29 May 2021 (UTC) |
Precious
biographies
Thank you for quality articles about people such as André Birotte Jr., William G. Tapply and Jamie Barton, for fighting vandalism, unsourced info, silly moves, promo, garbage and users who are "not here", for SPI expertise and instinct, for helping again, - opera lover, you are an awesome Wikipedian!
You are recipient no. 2602 of Precious, a prize of QAI. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:52, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
- Merci de ta chanson!.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:08, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
- I know I'm late with this. You know that I like and miss socks, and softened only years after "pride and prejudice". - Wikipedia is better with you than without, that's for sure! - See my talk today, - it's rare that a person is pictured when a dream comes true, and that the picture is shown on the Main page on a meaningful day. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
John Burns Medical School
I note that you undid my nomination for deletion for John A. Burns School of Medicine. I checked GNG and WP:ORG criterion before I put this up. Please expand on your message "read the criterion". Thank you. --Whiteguru (talk) 01:12, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- You don't even have to read the criterion; just look at the tag in preview. In any event, WP:A7 says "This applies to any article about [a long list of things] with the exception of educational institutions." (bolding in the original) --Bbb23 (talk) 01:21, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- The preview on the Page Curation Tool did not give any indication of that particular exception. I do thank you for your courtesy of a reply. --Whiteguru (talk) 09:16, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Whiteguru: You are responsible for the edits you make using tools. That said, I'm sure you were acting in good faith, and one can always learn from one's mistakes. As for the tool (tools?) itself, which I'm not familiar with, if you believe that the tool is supposed to warn you of the school exception, perhaps you should raise this in the appropriate forum so the tool may be improved.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- The preview on the Page Curation Tool did not give any indication of that particular exception. I do thank you for your courtesy of a reply. --Whiteguru (talk) 09:16, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Saman Aslam Speedy deletion
Hi, You rolled back my WP:A11 speedy deletion tag on Saman Aslam, although I selected A11 after learning through a video on TikTok the article subject was in fact written by the subject themselves and was blatantly promoting it. The author was also blocked from two accounts as they attempted to edit the article. Also, the article contains only one legitimate source while the other references are mere copies of the original source most likely written and sent by the author themselves.
I won't be tagging WP:A5 as I feel A11 remains appropriate, please let me know. Thanks Jibran1998 (talk) 16:29, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
- I think you're confused about tags. I'm guessing that you intended to tag it as WP:G11 (blatantly promotional), not A11. A5 is absolutely irrelevant, so I have no idea what you mean by that. You really need to read what the tags say (I've provided links to them) because it appears that you not competent in this area. As long as you're here, I would decline a G11 because the article itself is not promotional. What happens outside of Wikipedia is irrelevant; the article is evaluated on its face.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:18, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Administrators noticeboard
Hi, I was scrolling through the Administrators noticeboard and came across a complaint against me by an IP user? I was not notified of this, and am a bit confused regarding the outcome. Many thanks. UserNumber (talk) 22:36, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
- @UserNumber: It was actually at WP:ANI, and the now-closed thread is WP:ANI#User:UserNumber. As you can see, the IP's "complaint" about you was in reality a personal attack, and so I blocked them.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:15, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
- I see, thank you. It appears that this same IP user (Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1068#User:UserNumber) is back to cause trouble again. A few days ago, he edited Template:Bengalis, changing the main image to a Bengali swastika and said this: "kangladeshis are araob jaroj not real bengali so khankir chhele ekhane kangla post korbi na chutiya kangal". It is clear that he is referring to me. If you would like a translation then let me know, but it is extremely offensive and full of disgusting curse words. UserNumber (talk) 21:24, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
- @UserNumber: I did a machine translation, but it wasn't very helpful. I am curious as to what it says. However, there's not much I can do; we don't normally block IPs that haven't edited very recently, i.e., maybe the last 24 hours.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:09, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
- I see, thank you. It appears that this same IP user (Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1068#User:UserNumber) is back to cause trouble again. A few days ago, he edited Template:Bengalis, changing the main image to a Bengali swastika and said this: "kangladeshis are araob jaroj not real bengali so khankir chhele ekhane kangla post korbi na chutiya kangal". It is clear that he is referring to me. If you would like a translation then let me know, but it is extremely offensive and full of disgusting curse words. UserNumber (talk) 21:24, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
- His comments are an example of anti-Bangladeshi and anti-Muslim sentiment that exists in India. "Kangladeshi" is a portmanteau of kangal (beggarly) and Bangladeshi, often shortened to kangla. Beggarly-Bangladeshi, Arab b*stard not real Bengali, so son-of-a-harlot you will not do any Kangla posts here you चूतिया kangal would be an English translation of his edit summary. Funnily enough, although he accuses me of not being a "real Bengali", his sentence contains numerous English and Hindi words. UserNumber (talk) 23:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
May 2021: Blocked user:Akibmir88 has a buddy
You blocked Akibmir88 recently; his tag-team buddy user:Dayimabhat stepped up and continued the attempt to hijack Murtaza Ali Khan: [4], [5]. Between those two, the IP User:2409:4054:109:9E93:DACA:42:A2E4:CFC8 and User:Murtazaali555, none of them is here to make an encyclopedia and, I suspect, they are all Mr. Ali. Would you be interested in blocking them all and/or protecting the article? Thanks.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:59, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Quisqualis: I blocked Dayimabhat. I didn't see the need to block Murtazaali555 or the IP unless they resume editing. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:02, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23
I am no sure why this user think there is COI in a previous page that I created (Nicholas Conn), I have use all the reliable public information that I could find and wrote in a neutral point of view. I read this author's book, but didn't use it as reference.
I am just starting to contrubute so I have a lot to learn. you got to start somewhere, right? Could you please review this page and confirm that it allign with wikipedia terms and conditions. Or do I have to delete it? I'm not sure. The user who put the tag hasn't responded yet. See here. Sushant1432 (talk) 14:19, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
- You do not have to delete the article. TheWikiholic tagged the article with an invalid criterion, which is why I declined it. If they wish, they can tag it with an appropriate criterion, prod it, or nominate it for deletion. As for the UPE tag on the article, you can remove it if you think it's invalid. It could be re-added if a consensus were reached that it belongs there, but the opinion of one editor is insufficient.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:09, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for leaving me a message
I'm sorry that I was nominating too many articles for deletion. I was trying to do good. Please forgive me ;( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pyramids09 (talk • contribs) 21:09, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Discussion of Relibaility of Sources
Hi all there! I appreciate your help in resolving a dispute centered around the reliability of the New York Post and Gothamist. I am wondering if there is a forum for a discussion of such issues? The Wall Street Journal is considered to be very reliable and the New York Post is not. Why such disparity considering both are owned by News Corporation? Thank you for your continued concern. Sucker for All (talk) 22:18, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Why wont you respond to my request?
I am not sure why you would just delete everything when i am trying to resolve a serious situation. I am trying to add a better pool maintenance page than the one that exists. I started by adding to the pool sanitation page, but its such a mess i decided to create a brand new page with thorough information with everything needed for users to learn and get the info they need. The pool sanitation page does not offer any value. Its a hodgepodge of nonsense, so why cant i add a new and better option for users? Please respond. Please undo the delete on the maintenance page i started creating. If you have any specific issues with cited sources, i can update them, but seriously, i have pool industry knoweledge and i can add value to wikipedia. Please respond and dont delete this. have you even read the page? it has a lot of great info and its only going to get better with more time for me to find info and citation sources. Please dont just kill my hard work. respond please.AspenDecker (talk) 00:04, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Teahouse
Just so you know, you are being discussed at the Teahouse. The section is "Aggressive, Intolerant, Condescending Admin Issue. Please Help." Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:20, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, Cullen328, the user is not a happy camper. One of my pieces of advice was for them to go to the WP:Teahouse. Hoisted on my own petard! --Bbb23 (talk) 17:56, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- This editor seems to have genuine expertise on swimming pool maintenance and if we can induce them to write in encyclopedic style instead of "how-to manual" style, that would be a good thing. Don't you agree? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:11, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- First, why would an article on swimming pool maintenance be suitable for Wikipedia, even if well written? Second, if you want to help the user, that would be great. I'm sure you would be more deft than I.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:15, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- Perhaps because it is a notable topic? A Gooogle Books search shows at least five books devoted completely to that topic. We already have Swimming pool sanitation which is conceptually narrower, and this person seems to think that article has serious problems. Reading that article and their draft makes me very glad that I do not have a pool. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:27, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- The article on swimming pool sanitation, regardless of how it's written (we have tons of poorly written articles), makes sense to me as a topic because it's a scientific article. It doesn't surprise me that there are books on swimming pool maintenance; they would be useful to various kinds of people. Now maybe just the fact that there are books would make such a topic notable per Wikipedia's rather expansive notability guidelines, and perhaps there are other similar articles, but I don't see such an article as encyclopedic. If I'm wrong, then I'm definitely not the right person to help the user. I used to live in an area where pools were everywhere. I even knew one person who had an Olympic-size pool. When I was a kid, I liked swimming in pools, but I learned better later.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:34, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- My experience with pools is similar to yours. My parents had one in our back yard, but they sold that house in 1972. These days, if I get into one every five years, that's enough. I left a note for the editor. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:41, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- We never had a pool. I just had lots of friends with pools. Much better from my parents' point of view. I got plenty of pool time, and they didn't have to worry about swimming pool maintenance. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 18:49, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- My experience with pools is similar to yours. My parents had one in our back yard, but they sold that house in 1972. These days, if I get into one every five years, that's enough. I left a note for the editor. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:41, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- The article on swimming pool sanitation, regardless of how it's written (we have tons of poorly written articles), makes sense to me as a topic because it's a scientific article. It doesn't surprise me that there are books on swimming pool maintenance; they would be useful to various kinds of people. Now maybe just the fact that there are books would make such a topic notable per Wikipedia's rather expansive notability guidelines, and perhaps there are other similar articles, but I don't see such an article as encyclopedic. If I'm wrong, then I'm definitely not the right person to help the user. I used to live in an area where pools were everywhere. I even knew one person who had an Olympic-size pool. When I was a kid, I liked swimming in pools, but I learned better later.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:34, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- Perhaps because it is a notable topic? A Gooogle Books search shows at least five books devoted completely to that topic. We already have Swimming pool sanitation which is conceptually narrower, and this person seems to think that article has serious problems. Reading that article and their draft makes me very glad that I do not have a pool. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:27, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- First, why would an article on swimming pool maintenance be suitable for Wikipedia, even if well written? Second, if you want to help the user, that would be great. I'm sure you would be more deft than I.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:15, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- This editor seems to have genuine expertise on swimming pool maintenance and if we can induce them to write in encyclopedic style instead of "how-to manual" style, that would be a good thing. Don't you agree? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:11, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
California songs close
Hi Bbb23—I noticed you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about California (2nd nomination) earlier today. Having been the final !vote just before your close, I read all the prior discussion, and although the delete !votes were moderately more numerous, (11 to 7), I found them a lot less compelling and less policy-based, for the reasons I articulated in my keep !vote. Overall, the discussion seems fairly close to no consensus, and the fact that the final two !votes were both keep could indicate the start of a shift. Would you be willing to consider switching from a close to a relist to see if that possibility plays out? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 02:38, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Sdkb: Relisting the AfD is done when "the discussion has only a few participants (including the nominator), or it seems to be lacking arguments based on policy". Here, the AfD attracted sufficient attention, both !votes and comments, and, in my view, the Delete !votes were no "less compelling" than the Keeps. I understand you don't agree with the rationales of the Deletes, but, except in very obvious cases, that's often true. I imagine they don't agree with yours. :-) That said, I'm willing to change my close if another admin disagrees with me. Primefac does far many Closes than I do; what do you think? --Bbb23 (talk) 10:54, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- Sdkb, you're welcome to take it to DRV if you are unhappy with the close, but I'm not seeing anything egregiously wrong about the close as it stands; a short statement as to the thinking behind the "delete" choice might have been appropriate but that's about it. I don't really know if I would have relisted or closed as delete if I had come across this, but other things I would have taken into consideration are the complete lack of talk page discussion (multiple "we need to fix this" posts with zero action taken) and the previous AFD closing very much with the implication that it should be improved lest it be nominated again.
- All in all, though, I'd say this was a reasonable close. Primefac (talk) 13:09, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- I'd prefer not to have to go to DRV. But I have to take strong issue with the rationale
I understand you don't agree with the rationales of the Deletes, but, except in very obvious cases, that's often true. I imagine they don't agree with yours.
We should not just throw up our hands and go "some say keep, some say delete, who knows who's right?" We have guidelines about notability that are supposed to guide AfD discussions, WP:LISTN in this case, and it's the role of the closer to assess the discussion in light of those guidelines, not to count votes. The case for LISTN was objectively compelling: the standard is that a listhas been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources
, and by any reasonable definition that's exactly what [6][7][8] do. Many of the delete !votes, by contrast, should have been heavily discounted per WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 19:56, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
- I'd prefer not to have to go to DRV. But I have to take strong issue with the rationale
Hurricane Andrew Semi-Protection
Hi, I just wanted to ask you to reconsider your decision on the semi-protection for Hurricane Andrew. Blocking the user seems to have done nothing as I and other editors have still been continually reverting the same edits again and again by different accounts so clearly whoever is doing this is using a VPN. While I understand that these protections should be used in limited cases, I believe the amount of vandalism targeted towards this article is warranting some level of protection beyond just blocking every new account.
Thanks in advance. 1TWO3Writer (talk) 19:15, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Update: article was approved for semi-protection. Thanks anyway. 1TWO3Writer (talk) 21:30, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Sorrow of Sophie
Hello, long time no see. I am reviewing an unblock request from a block of yours done a little over 500 days ago. The block seems correct of course.
Their unblock request seems sincere and it has been about a year and a half. They seem to have gained a greater understanding of their error.
I of course want to hear your opinion on the matter before proceeding. I want to know if you feel the request is sincere, if you feel they deserve another chance. Of course if there is anything I am missing I would love to hear it.
I have always respected your opinion so I am eagerly awaiting your reply before I proceed with reviewing this unblock request. Thank you. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 11:18, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
FYI, checkuser Yamla has confirmed that there has been no evidence of recent sockpuppetry or block evasion. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 11:19, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Hey, thanks for checking with me. I think it depends on how you look at sock blocks. Some think that if you believe they won't sock again, regardless of anything else, you should grant the unblock request. Others, like me, think that even if you believe they won't sock again, you should look at the broader picture of whether the editor will be an asset to the project. I can see validity in both perspectives. In this instance, I think that the editor will not be an asset. Her very long essays on why she should be unblocked, what she's done wrong, etc., reflect a writing style that is hardly useful on an encyclopedia. She first started editing in 2016, and in the 4 years (she didn't edit much in 2016-17) before she was blocked (counting the few edits she did post-block) she had a meager 213 edits to articles, while editing her userspace 4,712 times. Take a look at her userpage just before she was tagged as a sockmaster. Frankly, it's a bit loony. I wouldn't unblock her, but it's your call.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:56, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Ouch. NOTHERE: A Study in yellow ——Serial 12:12, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Yowch, that made me see stars. —valereee (talk) 16:20, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Looks like they're blocked on zh.wiki too. —valereee (talk) 13:36, 5 June 2021 (UTC)- @Valereee: I don't see that in their list of global accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:47, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Bbb, I saw that, too. The reason I thought so was from their user page at Special:Permalink/934852842, where a link to their zh account is crossed out. Maybe that doesn't mean anything? —valereee (talk) 15:16, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Valereee: I'm not sure why the striking script does that, but the apparent reason is that particular link does not have the Chinese word for user prefixing her username, as it does for the other languages she lists. For a side-by-side comparison, see my Sandbox.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:30, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Oh, interesting, thanks! Yes, the user page at ru.wiki is using cyrillic, so no strikeout. :D Looks like their user pages at those two wikis are identical to the one here. Yeah, definitely nothere. —valereee (talk) 16:16, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Valereee: I'm not sure why the striking script does that, but the apparent reason is that particular link does not have the Chinese word for user prefixing her username, as it does for the other languages she lists. For a side-by-side comparison, see my Sandbox.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:30, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Bbb, I saw that, too. The reason I thought so was from their user page at Special:Permalink/934852842, where a link to their zh account is crossed out. Maybe that doesn't mean anything? —valereee (talk) 15:16, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Valereee: I don't see that in their list of global accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:47, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Ouch. NOTHERE: A Study in yellow ——Serial 12:12, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt reply. I am going to sleep on the matter. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 12:06, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
After sleeping on it, and taking a deeper dive into their contribution history I have decided to decline the unblock request. Thank you for your input. HighInBC Need help? Just ask. 23:29, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- @HighInBC: Thanks for letting me (us?) know.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:41, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Unwarranted block
Would you consider maybe shortening the block for User:CarbFreeCrumb to several months or something? I agree their edits aren't constructive, but maybe it's a temporary mental health sort of thing given the pandemic. Other than the teahouse post they didn't seem disruptive. I'm a non-admin, and to be honest, I tend to give people _too_ much of the benefit of the doubt, so I'll defer to your experience. Benevolent human (talk) 04:11, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- No, of course not.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:37, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Alrighty, well thanks for considering my thoughts and replying. Have an excellent day. Benevolent human (talk) 14:14, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Page deletion
Although i appreciate you are simply acting in the interests of keeping wikipedia "clean", operating full time and ahead of other less "committed" editors leaves them with virtually no chance to update pages that they are in the process of creating incrementally. Can I respectfully request that you not destroy people's efforts with such ultra-rapid deletion? I had simply taken a quick break and was just returning to editing the page. Lkcl (talk) 00:15, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- You've got this backwards. You are the one who wasted the time of the editor who tagged the article and my time in deleting it, let alone arguing with you now. It was hardly "ultra-rapid deletion"; the editor waited 43 minutes before tagging it. Policy says you should wait 10 minutes. If you are creating an article "incrementally", then do it in your sandbox or in draft space, not article space. In any event, you didn't lose anything as there was nothing to lose.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
June 21
I suppose I had also better ask you not to edit war as well.Slatersteven (talk) 14:35, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Slatersteven: <smile> Absolutely right. I'll stop. Besides, the article is an unsourced (not a single ref) mess anyway. Not so bad for the stations that have articles, but the rest is pathetic. BTW, when you warn editors about 3RR, it's always best to include the name of the article in the warning. Thanks!--Bbb23 (talk) 15:34, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Redirect for deletion: Chris Meyers
In your reversion of my nomination for deletion, you wrote that there was "nothing wrong with the redirect." It is a misspelling of the third-billed character's name from an obscure movie. That is hardly appropriate grounds for a redirect. I'd love to see an explanation of how there's "nothing wrong with" it. --Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 16:30, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- First, the redirect was not a WP:G1. Second, your explanation in your edit summary was absolutely unhelpful to any reviewing administrator. Finally, now that I understand what was wrong with it (I didn't notice the misspelling), I've deleted it per WP:G6.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:38, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Page for deletion
I found this page called Kashmoney TheForce, and I found 4 reasons it should be deleted. May you please delete this page?
Thank you! Pyramids09 (talk) 19:18, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- What are the four criteria?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:20, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Patent nonsense, Notability, Promo, and Typos. Pyramids09 (talk) 19:26, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Putting aside that I wanted you to name the actual criteria, the article was NOT patent nonsense, and there is no such criterion as "typos". Stop involving yourself in this stuff; I've told you before that you don't know what you're doing. The article was properly deleted per WP:A7, but that's irrelevant to my advice to you.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:36, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Patent nonsense, Notability, Promo, and Typos. Pyramids09 (talk) 19:26, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
It was almost worth keeping the article for the picture, though. Is that Jay-Z? Yeezy? Lil Nas X? No man, that's Kashmoney!!-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:42, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Looks like a bad television parody of a rapper, although what I know about such things .... Maybe they should use his picture here?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:49, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- Oi. That's a pretty WP:BEANS-y suggestion...-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 21:53, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Disruptive edits by old disruptive account
Hello BBb23, a old account, blocked previously have restart its POV activity on two articles, First in Seljuk Empire article and then Northwestern Syria offensive (December 2019–March 2020) the account want to reiterate a edition he made first in Feb 28, 2020 with a edit sumary of "Stalemate ongoing", however two years have passed since the end of the offensive, he still want to revert the stable version of the article First , Second time in the week.Mr.User200 (talk) 00:56, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- I blocked the user 8 years ago. If they are violating policy, report it to the appropriate noticeboard.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:10, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – June 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2021).
Administrator changes
- Ashleyyoursmile • Less Unless
- Husond • MattWade • MJCdetroit • Carioca • Vague Rant • Kingboyk • Thunderboltz • Gwen Gale • AniMate • SlimVirgin (deceased)
Guideline and policy news
- Consensus was reached to deprecate Wikipedia:Editor assistance.
- Following a Request for Comment the Book namespace was deprecated.
Technical news
- Wikimedia previously used the IRC network Freenode. However, due to changes over who controlled the network with reports of a forceful takeover by several ex-staff members, the Wikimedia IRC Group Contacts decided to move to the new Libera Chat network. It has been reported that Wikimedia related channels on Freenode have been forcibly taken over if they pointed members to Libera. There is a migration guide and Wikimedia discussions about this.
Arbitration
- After a Clarification request, the Arbitration Committee modified Remedy 5 of the Antisemitism in Poland case. This means sourcing expectations are a discretionary sanction instead of being present on all articles. It also details using the talk page or the Reliable Sources Noticeboard to discuss disputed sources.
Regarding your comment on the Talk page of "Itti"
Good Day Bbb23,
I have received a message about you mentioning me on a comment of yours on the Talk page of the german Admin @Itti.
I noticed some misinformation delievered to you by this User.
If you have questions regarding my Blockage on the german Wikipedia, please feel free to ask me on my Talk Page.
Best Regards,
Article deletion
Good day sir, my article Ume Samuel Ikeogu got deleted, i'm still working on the article while it was moved for speedy deletion, i will be glad if you help me solved the issues, thank.... Samnaija (talk) 21:41, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I'm unwilling to help you. The article was a promotional autobiography about a non-notable person and would never be acceptable as an article on Wikipedia. In addition, your history demonstrates that all you've done is create poor articles that have been deleted because they are not up to standards.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:20, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
It's not a promotional auto-biography and I wasn't paid to do that, I found that many people wishes to know everything about Samuel Ume Ikeogu that was why I came up with the article Samnaija (talk) 12:46, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
requesting an admin and you seem to be active at the moment
The new editor ChrisCalif (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been bludgeoning an AfD (See the page history) and accusing others of paid editing for the past few hours, despite several warnings ([9], [10], [11] [12]), including an explicit warning from me that I'd ask an admin to intervene.
So now I'm asking an admin to intervene. If you can't or won't, I'll ask another, no problem. I just saw that you edited ANI a few minutes ago and thought you might be available. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 18:06, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- "and accusing others of paid editing for the past few hours" this is totally false claim, please read the page, where I simply and politely ask if anyone should be paid editors then it is a good time to disclose. I specifically mentioned "PS I am not accusing a single editor here for this, I am just kindly asking if any such conflict of interest. " Please read the whole page, I am simply pointing out weak arguments on a page where one should discuss.ChrisCalif (talk) 18:09, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- I also got this answer from another editor "@ChrisCalif: You're absolutely right. Many (maybe most) paid editors do not disclose it " So I just wanted to give all a fair chance to think if they had any conflict of interest here, and as is evident I did this politely by stating PS I am not accusing a single editor here for this, I am just kindly asking if any such conflict of interest. ". It is me that are bullied and tried censored/blocked here for simply pointing out a series of weak arguments for blocking a page, and I shortly brought iu also this issue, because if this other editor is right then this is alarming? "Many (maybe most) paid editors do not disclose it "" ChrisCalif (talk) 18:13, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- Here is the page, the attack and harassment is on me, and very false claims
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Quantized_inertia ChrisCalif (talk) 18:34, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- I just wanted to say thanks for looking into this. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 13:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Animalworlds314
Sorry, since you were so good as to block them, you get this dropped in your lap :p To no one's surprise, they are back and artlessly socking as an IP. I guess this is static and could thus be blocked? Cheers! --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:38, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
- Also Tahrzan2105 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). This guy may turn into a whack-a-mole event in short order. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:02, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
User:MrloniBoo
Hi, might you reconsider the block you issued to User:MrloniBoo? I don't feel that their comments about me at WP:AIV, while I may not concur with them, constitute a personal attack. Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 16:46, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
- MB's filing a retaliatory report at AIV against an editor with whom they disagree in and of itself is both a personal attack and an abuse of process. Nonetheless, I would consider unblocking MB if they show some insight that what they did was wrong. Their unblock request does not indicate that they understand what they did or are unlikely to repeat such behavior. Going to AIV to "request[] a review of [your] administrator status"? And then accusing me of attacking them. This is not the kind of attitude any editor should have.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:05, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Abdul Afghan
Hi BB23. Right after Abdul Afghan's block expired, he restored his edit [13] --HistoryofIran (talk) 21:52, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
Forgot to hit submit on an spi...
I noticed this user earlier and just saw the comment at AIV, but they're a LaurelWest sock/sock of this spammer. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- I'm lost. What comment at WP:AIV? Do you mean the report at WP:UAA and my asking for a checkuser? I have every confidence in your ability to spot a sock, but I'm not familiar with the case at all, and particularly after the allegation that Bbbterry is impersonating me, I'm reluctant to be the admin who blocks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:48, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, I had a screen open several hours ago after they recreated a spam article but forgot to hit submit. Can't really comment beyond that though for obvious reasons. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:50, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- I've added a comment at UAA based on the above. Perhaps you can speed things along a bit by filing a report at SPI?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:59, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- I can't see a link to the username, however, one generic block for looking dodgy coming right up. These things are always so messy :/ At this time, Praxi may want to peruse this and this, which I'll probably banhammer, as well as this. -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:37, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- From reviewing the SPI, which seems to be only part of the picture, it looks messy. Thanks for taking care of it.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- I can't see a link to the username, however, one generic block for looking dodgy coming right up. These things are always so messy :/ At this time, Praxi may want to peruse this and this, which I'll probably banhammer, as well as this. -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:37, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- I've added a comment at UAA based on the above. Perhaps you can speed things along a bit by filing a report at SPI?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:59, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, I had a screen open several hours ago after they recreated a spam article but forgot to hit submit. Can't really comment beyond that though for obvious reasons. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:50, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
B. Fairbairn at it again
I've opened an ANI about it, but User:B. Fairbairn is at it again, after a six year hiatus, removing pictures all over the place in country articles if they have US politicians in them, often with edit summaries accusing the presence of the images as "bias" or just calling them "boring." Since you were involved in at least one of the previous discussions on their behavior, I figured I would ping you. --OuroborosCobra (talk) 23:55, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Deletion of Madhusudan Chaurasiya
please explain why did you delete the article as it was a work in progress and I believe you should not have deleted it. Ravindra Sah (talk) 14:42, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- Because it has no credible claim of significance, just like the WP:A7 tag says. If you have a "work in progress", then create it as a draft and submit it through WP:AFC. Also, do not send me any more e-mail on this issue. There's nothing that can't be discussed on-wiki.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:47, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Thethxrn
Bbb23, thank you for the block on User:Thethxrn and the revdel of my talk page. Both are much appreciated, Laplorfill (talk) 18:24, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- You're welcome. You'll be pleased to know that the user didn't just pick on you. They attacked me with their usual on their Talk page, so I turned off Talk page access. Then they sent me an e-mail with a slur in it, so I disabled e-mail. Hopefully, that will put an end to this.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:27, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- Given the vandalism of your talk page by User:-Floral- and their shared editing history with User:Thethxrn, I suspect they are sockpuppets. I also suspect User:CodenameFlora might be, based on similarity of usernames and shared editing history of La Crosse Aris FC, FC Flora and Duluth FC, so worth keeping an eye on that one. I haven't filed an SPI as I suspect CodenameFlora's data is too old? Anyway, best as always, Laplorfill (talk) 20:49, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- I think you should file the SPI. I also think you should request a CU in case there are other accounts lurking. It's true that CodenameFlora hasn't edited in over a year, but there are large gaps in -Floral-'s history as well, and it's unlikely to be coincidental that -Floral- should come out of the woodwork right after I blocked Thethxrn, so you should include CodenameFlora, at least for the record, even though it can't be checked.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:02, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- Pssttt. I took a look at Thethxrn when the -Floral- account reared its head earlier. Large, busy, dynamic ranges and ISPs at play, so WP:RBI may work better.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:09, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you, Madame Ponyo. @Laplorfill, less work for you; ignore my advice.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:18, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, both. I've watchlisted their common pages, and will keep an eye out for suspicious activity. Laplorfill (talk) 23:19, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you, Madame Ponyo. @Laplorfill, less work for you; ignore my advice.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:18, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- Pssttt. I took a look at Thethxrn when the -Floral- account reared its head earlier. Large, busy, dynamic ranges and ISPs at play, so WP:RBI may work better.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:09, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- I think you should file the SPI. I also think you should request a CU in case there are other accounts lurking. It's true that CodenameFlora hasn't edited in over a year, but there are large gaps in -Floral-'s history as well, and it's unlikely to be coincidental that -Floral- should come out of the woodwork right after I blocked Thethxrn, so you should include CodenameFlora, at least for the record, even though it can't be checked.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:02, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
- Given the vandalism of your talk page by User:-Floral- and their shared editing history with User:Thethxrn, I suspect they are sockpuppets. I also suspect User:CodenameFlora might be, based on similarity of usernames and shared editing history of La Crosse Aris FC, FC Flora and Duluth FC, so worth keeping an eye on that one. I haven't filed an SPI as I suspect CodenameFlora's data is too old? Anyway, best as always, Laplorfill (talk) 20:49, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Étienne de Perier
Hello, Bbb23. Since you placed the admin-only edit restriction on Étienne de Perier, can I ask you to please replace the current lede with the consensus version reached on the talk page? It's in the big blue box at what's currently the bottom of the page. Thank you. Carter (talk) 20:57, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- See my comments on the article Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:44, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you, and you're right that article was a mess. I'm doing my best to get things back on track with it. Carter (talk) 23:02, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
You may have missed it in the report, but that account was making the same edits as an IP I've partially blocked for a week. So I blocked it indef as a sock. Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what I missed, but your blocking the named user as a sock is not correct. You partially blocked the IP on June 19 at 2:16. Dharshman's two consecutive edits were on June 18 at 21:54 and :58. So, Darshman's edit were not block evasion. Nor were they socking. This was simply a case of a person creating an account after they edited as an IP. That said, if you think the edits were disruptive enough to merit an indefinite block for the named account, that's fine. BTW, in glancing at the article, even with your blocks, it looks like the article probably should be protected.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:54, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Hoax
Hello , As you have deleted this hoax page( Draft:Aks Army ) , I wanted to inform you of this one (User:Aksarmy/sandbox). «𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐀𝐦𝐢𝐧» (talk) 17:12, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:18, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Questions re. misfiling
I noticed that in the edit summary for the sock investigation you closed, you mentioned that it was misfiled. Just in case I happen to run into a similar issue in the future and need to report an LTA user, where would be the correct place to petition for an investigation? Thank you kindly in advance! --CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:17, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
- Urbanuntil is a sock of Waldemar15. You should have filed your report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Waldemar15.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:28, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
- I understand now. Thank you very much for the quick reply! --CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:32, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Skalid Obi
While Skalid Obi probably isn't notable, the sources included were a good faith claim of importance and I disagree with speedying the article. You deleted it just as I was recommending PROD or AfD instead. ----Fabrictramp | talk to me 19:45, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
- Feel free to restore it and handle it as you wish.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:47, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
It's not what you say, it's how you say it
IMO that was a borderline AIV vs ANI case. And it might even be a CIR issue, and not vandalism. There would have been nothing wrong with saying "There are some good faith edits here, too. Looks tricky to me. I think this needs more eyes, so can you take this to ANI instead, please?" Then, there would have been no "protracted discussion" at AIV. But when you just dismiss people like FMSky with lines like
, would do you expect is going to happen? That they'll just accept your totally unexplained decision, because you're the admin? That not how I think, and that's not how most people think. Please consider that people making reports to AIV may be very frustrated with the vandal, by the time they get to AIV, and dismissive attitude just increases the frustration. The are almost certainly not trying to waste your time, or anyone's time, with a less-than-perfect report. A few words can go a long way. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 21:15, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Declined. for many reasons
Thanks for rescue of Speedy by Vedbas, a developer, who by the way said he was wrong
First, thank you very much for your timely rescue of Pearl.com here.
- I'd also like to add that, when I asked Vedbas why, his response included "I was wrong" - and it takes courage and a good sense of knowing to admit this. Once again, thanks for your rescue/intervention on Pearl.com.
- My late mother said that only fools rush in where angels fear to tread. She probably (and my later father) didn't raise a complete fool, so/but/therefore I'm saying that, perhaps, you should consider yourself a part-time semi-unretired, for now, and ease your way back into things at wiki. I apologize if my commenting on this matter is inappropriate. Either way, once again thanks re Pearl.com. Pi314m (talk) 01:58, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- I'd also like to add that, when I asked Vedbas why, his response included "I was wrong" - and it takes courage and a good sense of knowing to admit this. Once again, thanks for your rescue/intervention on Pearl.com.
In order to address its proposed deletion, I'd like to understand please why you question the notability of this significant international photography journal. It is not a 'popular photography' magazine, but one intended for an academic audience. It s long-running (since 1980) and as a lecturer in visual culture I depended on it for current activity in the medium that wasn't solely American. It is the German equivalent of Aperture. Thank you n advance of your response, Jamesmcardle(talk) 06:15, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- I have nothing more to say other than what I said in my nominating statement.--Bbb23 (talk) 06:18, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- Then please withdraw the deletion; European Photography meets Wikipedia:Notability (academic journals)#Criteria Criteria 2 & 3. It is discussed in Warren, L. (2005). Encyclopedia of Twentieth-Century Photography, 3-Volume Set. United States: Taylor & Francis, p.1211 and referenced in Matthews, D. (2005). professional organizations, photographers'. In The Oxford Companion to the Photograph. : Oxford University Press. Retrieved 21 Jun. 2021, from https://www-oxfordreference-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/view/10.1093/acref/9780198662716.001.0001/acref-9780198662716-e-1277.Jamesmcardle(talk) 08:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Apowersoft products - experience on fr-wp
Hi Bbb23, contacting you because you blocked Juvenile85 and speedy deleted Apowersoft. I'm a sysop on fr-wiki and not fond at all of advertising, undisclosed payment and (self) promotion.
On fr-wp there was a bunch of users whose only interest was to write about Apowersoft or WANGXU TECHNOLOGY (HK) CO., LIMITED products: ApowerMirror, GitMind, LetsView, BeeCut, Apowersoft Bg Remover, etc. When a page was protected (because of notability guidelines) they used another typo to publish their stuff. When "BeeCut" was protected, they created "Beecut"; when "GitMind" was deleted, they created "Gitmind". When a link to their product was removed on Mental mapping, another account came and included GitMind, and then another one, and so on.
As a result, last week the sysop on fr-wp decided to ban all the single-purpose accounts, blacklist all the links to apowersoft products, and create a filter to block the names "apowersoft", "GitMind" etc. fr:Wikipédia:Bulletin des administrateurs/2021/Semaine 24#Apowersoft et ses fans CAOU
Thought you might be interested in the information. Feel free to share with anyone. Best regards, - Bédévore [knock knock] 09:06, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Bédévore, thanks for the report. The other two articles created by User:Juvenile85, ApowerMirror and GitMind, are up for deletion through different processes. MER-C is one of our best admins on UPE, blacklists, etc. Perhaps they can help. One question: have you found socking involved at fr.wiki?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:52, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for your answer and for introducing me to MER-C - if you're not happy with promotion, self promotion, and UPE, we'll become close friends! :) Unfortunately the first SPI last year was declined but the latest SPI found that User:NjaraParf = User:Marinah25 https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikip%C3%A9dia:V%C3%A9rificateur_d%27adresses_IP/Requ%C3%AAtes/juin_2021&diff=183865252&oldid=183862422. Best regards, - Bédévore [knock knock] 15:59, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- Both of those users have never edited on en.wiki, and for purposes of CheckUsering are
Stale.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:03, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- Both of those users have never edited on en.wiki, and for purposes of CheckUsering are
- Hi, thanks for your answer and for introducing me to MER-C - if you're not happy with promotion, self promotion, and UPE, we'll become close friends! :) Unfortunately the first SPI last year was declined but the latest SPI found that User:NjaraParf = User:Marinah25 https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikip%C3%A9dia:V%C3%A9rificateur_d%27adresses_IP/Requ%C3%AAtes/juin_2021&diff=183865252&oldid=183862422. Best regards, - Bédévore [knock knock] 15:59, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Seeking Help
I noticed you closed the 3RR dispute between myself and User:Magitroopa. As he has stated in his response in the 3RR dispute, this is not the first time we have been disagreeing on things. He claims that I am demonstrating WP:OWNERSHIP when all I'm trying to do is to maintain the standards kept on previous articles of the same show we are debating about. He wants to change what admittedly are somewhat pedantic things like the format of titles in sources (changing single quotes to italics, for example) or adding details to tables which hasn't ever been done before. I want to work with this user, but IMO, he's the one demonstrating ownership by making changes and just responding with "it's fine" when I edit them. All I want to do is to maintain the standards set in previous articles. We just seem to keep butting heads on how the articles should be written, and obviously we have a common interest in the articles. I'd like to reach a point where we can work together, but I just don't know where to start. Suggestions? - SanAnMan (talk) 22:11, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- And the problem with maintaining 'the standards kept on previous articles' is carrying over MOS-related issues, such as this latest issue involving italicization. I'm not sure why that's now still being brought up, as MOS:CONFORMTITLE has already shown what should be done (Specifically fourth bullet down). I will agree that the previous NYU inclusion was not an MOS-related edit war (though it is not a WP:SYNTHESIS or WP:OR issue like you seem to believe, given there are citations that supports the information).
- Such as here, there is no need for an excessive usage of capital letters just to keep up 'standards' that don't even follow MOS. As I've mentioned before, the lead alone on past articles don't follow MOS the best, including MOS:NUMERAL and MOS:AVOIDBOLD.
- I am very much open to working together/working something out, but it is increasingly hard/frustrating when you decided what has been done throughout past articles takes precedence over guidelines of any sort. Magitroopa (talk) 22:38, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
- I have no suggestions other than the usual: try to work it out, and if you can't, then try to get other editors involved so a consensus can be reached. Certainly it's best to avoid mutual claims of "ownership"; the old refrain is indeed true: focus on content, not conduct. Finally, from my own perspective, there are many disputes that are not worth warring over, and MOS disputes rank near the top of that list.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:07, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
ANI notice
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Sucker for All's "I didn't hear that" attitude. Thank you. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 00:10, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Sandbox deletion
Hi, I wasn't able to click the "contest this speedy deletion" in time, so I'm posting here.
I think there must be some sort of misunderstanding, I'm not spreading hoaxes I'm just making alternate election political boxes for fun in my sandbox. CoryJosh (talk) 00:43, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- That's not what your sandbox is for.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:57, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I see you've reverted my request for speedy deletion. I'd like to better understand why you believe this biography meets WP:GNG when it has no WP:RS. The single citations that even indicates this person once walked the earth contains no information to suggest that this even remotely meets the standards for WP:bio. I'm really just looking for some clarification. Thanks in advance. GhostDust (talk) 15:31, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think you have sufficient experience to tag any articles for deletion. In this instance, the article has existed for many years and is not suitable for speedy deletion. You may use another deletion process if you wish.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:24, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- My experience notwithstanding, I'm trying to better understand why you feel this article has merit and should be part of an encyclopedia. I believe that it is suitable for speedy deletion based on criteria A7 of WP:CSD GhostDust (talk) 17:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- Your lack of experience is relevant. To speedy delete an article based on WP:A7, it has to be far more obvious that the person is not notable. The "standards for WP:BIO" are not relevant to A7. The lack of sources in an article is not relevant to A7. The article just has to make a credible claim of significance, and, in my view, this article does. Also, the continuing existence of an article after many years does not make it impervious to speedy deletion, but it does mean that the article is more likely to survive speedy deletion than a new article.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:29, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- You are not answering the core question I am posing: what makes this article significant? By your suggestion, an article with no reliable sources still deserves to exist in an encyclopedia. What more obvious element is necessary to make it clear that this is a bio of a person who is not notable? GhostDust (talk) 17:43, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) GhostDust The revert has nothing to do with whether the article is notable and "deserves" to be on Wikipedia. It probably is not notable and in it's current state probably should be deleted. However, WP:SPEEDY probably will not lead to its deletion as it's been around for a while. It's not that Bbb23 thinks it is notable, but he realizes that proposing speedy deletion will not get anything done. - ZLEA T\C 18:06, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- ok. That's clear. While the logic that articles that have "been around for a while" makes them more resistant to WP:Speedy is unfortunate, the point you've made is well-taken. Thank you ZLEA. GhostDust (talk) 18:46, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher) GhostDust The revert has nothing to do with whether the article is notable and "deserves" to be on Wikipedia. It probably is not notable and in it's current state probably should be deleted. However, WP:SPEEDY probably will not lead to its deletion as it's been around for a while. It's not that Bbb23 thinks it is notable, but he realizes that proposing speedy deletion will not get anything done. - ZLEA T\C 18:06, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- You are not answering the core question I am posing: what makes this article significant? By your suggestion, an article with no reliable sources still deserves to exist in an encyclopedia. What more obvious element is necessary to make it clear that this is a bio of a person who is not notable? GhostDust (talk) 17:43, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- Your lack of experience is relevant. To speedy delete an article based on WP:A7, it has to be far more obvious that the person is not notable. The "standards for WP:BIO" are not relevant to A7. The lack of sources in an article is not relevant to A7. The article just has to make a credible claim of significance, and, in my view, this article does. Also, the continuing existence of an article after many years does not make it impervious to speedy deletion, but it does mean that the article is more likely to survive speedy deletion than a new article.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:29, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- My experience notwithstanding, I'm trying to better understand why you feel this article has merit and should be part of an encyclopedia. I believe that it is suitable for speedy deletion based on criteria A7 of WP:CSD GhostDust (talk) 17:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Why my sandbox was deleted
Hello, I just happened to see you deleted my sandbox. The reason given was unambiguous advertisement promotion. But I havent done any advertisement or promotion. So why was it deleted? Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 06:33, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
- It appeared to be promotion of Captain Raju. Do you need it for something?--Bbb23 (talk) 13:34, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
- Curently I have no problem with you deleting my sandbox. Because I already expanded the article of Captain Raju based on the contents from my sandbox. He was a reputed actor in Malayalam cinema. His article was in bad shape. I just wanted to improve his article and had no intention of promoting him. Why would I need to promote a dead person? I had also expanded and is also expanding the articles of other major actors in Malayalam cinema. If you had deleted my sandbox prior to the expansion of Captain Raju, it would have been totally unfair. I still have no complete idea about how deletion process works here. In case if you felt my editing as promotional, you could have asked me first rather than deleting it. I now feel so disappointed by your action. My sole intention was to improve film related articles. Check yourself if you want it. I hope you understood it. Thank you Pillechan (പിള്ളേച്ചനോട് പറ) 16:22, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Talk page
Sory was not aware they had lost talk page access.Slatersteven (talk) 17:07, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- I didn't post a message to their Talk page to that effect, so you'd have no easy way of knowing. Not a problem.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:32, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
"User:Bbb23 Blocked me"
Hey, FYI in case you don't have mention notification enabled User_talk:KylieTastic#User:Bbb23_Blocked_me. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 15:13, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- @KylieTastic: I do receive pings, but thanks for going the extra step. I blocked the user. I can't be sure, but based on my block log, my guess is the master is User:Ifni95.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:21, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- For the record, I changed my mind about the probable master. Likely User:1983kid.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:33, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
RE: Leaving comments on peoples talk pages
Hello Bbb23,
Thanks for the feedback- the last thing I want to be is disruptive. I apologize for any upset I've caused.
Maybe you can help point me in the right direction- Wikipedia is vast and I'm very new to this side of the website: I'm a long time lurker, first time editor. I'm trying to find people who would be interested in backing a WikiProject I'm passionate about but I don't know of a way to reach out to other people. Can you tell me the best practice for this sort of communication so I don't disturb other anyone?
Thanks again for reaching out to me and helping me learn the proper manners of Wikipedia! SilmarilElwing 23:51, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- First, you've done enough with the posts to user Talk pages. Second, if you want to seek additional assistance, try the WP:Teahouse. But I'm troubled by what you say on your userpage: "If you're interested in supporting this cause and educating fellow Wikipedians, consider backing the Tech Repairability WikiProject Proposal." Read literally, that means you want to educate other users on Wikipedia about their right to fix devices. That is not what Wikipedia is about. Users are supposed to improve articles, not assist each other in their personal lives. That is more like a social media website or a repair blog.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Accidental recreation of Trident Group
Bbb23, Hi, I saw you deleted Trident Group, which I was in the process of reviewing. I added a shortdesc using shortdesc helper and accidentally recreated the page. I've tagged it for deletion again. Sorry for the trouble! A S U K I T E 15:43, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Asukite: Thanks for letting me know. BTW, you don't have to ping me on my own Talk page. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 15:45, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, I was using reply-link and didn't even realize it. Thanks again! A S U K I T E 16:00, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
Mohammed106
Hello, Bbb23! I just wanted to inform you that, evidently, a user whom you recently banned indefinitely for disruptive editing (Mohammed106 – their contributions) started with disruption once more, this time with an IP address (contributions can be seen here). Additionally, they constantly mention you on their talk page. Anyway, List of heads of state of Libya is already semi-protected for a month by GorillaWarfare, should List of heads of government of Libya be semi-protected as well? —Sundostund (talk) 09:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Sundostund: The IP hasn't edited since June 28, and the List of heads of government of Libya has not been disrupted since then either. If the IP resumes editing, let me know.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:54, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
July 2021
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Involved (possibly) block by Bbb23. Thank you. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
UoU
I'm a little troubled by your recent block of this user. From what I can see, there are competence issues, yes, but they seem to be sincere competence issues, rather than disingenuous ones — and the user has asked for guidance but barely been given any.
Am I missing something? DS (talk) 16:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- I see nothing to indicate that the user is sincere about anything other than his wish to disrupt the project. And I see many indicators of pretension and insidious vandalism. Post my comments, he asks the question "How do I stop being incompetent?"; that is a question only a troll would ask. Then he pretends to take the sardonic response from an experienced user literally and posts yet another frivolous unblock request "I am here to build an encyclopedia and only I can answer if if I'm incompetent." - yet another troll-like statement. Even the user's username is troll-like.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:24, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- DS pinged me for input. I generally agree with Bbb23, that even saying one is sincere and desires to help, and even if it's true, we actually need some ability and competance at least enough to get started. Instead, "blocks prevent disruption" and that's really all I see here whether or not it's intentional trolling. Maybe it's a kid? Maybe English isn't strong enough? For whatever reason, they only skim what's posted and don't seem to bother to understand the linked key terms. Maybe...who knows. Unless someone wants to pick them up for WP:Mentorship, best I could envision is WP:SO while they demonstrate compentant editing on a sister site. DMacks (talk) 05:01, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- Their simpleWP edit makes it clear that they're not here to contribute to serious encyclopedia-writing endeavors. DMacks (talk) 05:10, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- @DMacks: I can't see the two deleted edits the user made at simple, so you must've seen them before they were deleted.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:26, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- The one I saw was "kid goofing off" indistinguishable from trolling when taken together with their other edits. Not malicious vandalism, but not remotely constructive towards building an encyclopedia. DMacks (talk) 01:50, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
- @DMacks: I can't see the two deleted edits the user made at simple, so you must've seen them before they were deleted.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:26, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- I declined the unblock-request. DMacks (talk) 11:15, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2021
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
- An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.
Technical news
- IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.
Arbitration
- The community authorised COVID-19 general sanctions have been superseded by the COVID-19 discretionary sanctions following a motion at a case request. Alerts given and sanctions placed under the community authorised general sanctions are now considered alerts for and sanctions under the new discretionary sanctions.
"2021 European Sambo Championships" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect 2021 European Sambo Championships. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 3#2021 European Sambo Championships until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Deancarmeli (talk) 13:54, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
More sockpuppets of BioHack9781
It looks like BioHack9781 has a few more sockpuppets: MEDDITOR and GoldBerggg. ElKevbo (talk) 13:30, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- Blocked and tagged. Thanks, ElKevbo.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:01, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
- Likely addition sockpuppets: TheOrangestOrange, Garbageplatedawg, HugoBozz88, and TheRyeGuy88. It's probably worth opening an SPI to check for others, too. ElKevbo (talk) 17:26, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- @ElKevbo: I'm not keen on filing reports at SPI. I'll look into the accounts you mention on my own, but if you want someone to look for others, you'll have to either open an SPI yourself (requesting CU) or contact a CheckUser directly whom you think will be willing to do it without a report. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:36, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- Will do. In the meantime, here are some more: Archaicking88 and Jungua88. ElKevbo (talk) 04:59, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
- @ElKevbo: I'm not keen on filing reports at SPI. I'll look into the accounts you mention on my own, but if you want someone to look for others, you'll have to either open an SPI yourself (requesting CU) or contact a CheckUser directly whom you think will be willing to do it without a report. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:36, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- Likely addition sockpuppets: TheOrangestOrange, Garbageplatedawg, HugoBozz88, and TheRyeGuy88. It's probably worth opening an SPI to check for others, too. ElKevbo (talk) 17:26, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
Carl Niehaus
Hello Bbb23, I noticed you are one of the admins around right now and I could need your help. Carl Niehaus seems to be a go-to place for BLP violations since a few days. Various IPs keep adding vulgarities in South African slang to the article. Could you have a look at that, and semi-protect the article? I went to RFPP, but there aren't many eyes currently.. Thanks for your help! – NJD-DE (talk) 17:44, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
- Done for 5 days.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:51, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
Phil De Luna (2)
Hi Bbb23. We spoke briefly in the spring about Draft:Phil De Luna, which you had deleted due to POV concerns from another editor.
Since deletion, the draft has (I hope) been rendered more neutral. The subject has also become a nominee for the anticipated Canadian federal election. The candidates' page for the election is rapidly being blue-linked. Incumbency seems to guarantee an article, but a nomination would also seem to be enough when combined with an otherwise notable background.
In any case, I am wondering what the next best step with it is. Is the AfC process the only means of moving it back to article space? Could you or another admin look at it again? Or could I even just move it back myself and take my chances? Thanks! Greenbound (talk) 01:29, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- You created the biography in article space, and another editor (a non-administrator) moved it to draft space, and requested that I delete the article per WP:G7, which I did. I didn't delete it for POV (I assume you mean promotional because there is no other "POV" that makes an article speedy-deletable). From looking at the draft now and looking at your edit history, you appear to have a WP:COI, either with De Luna himself or with related subjects. You certainly seem to be focused on (1) De Luna and (2) green issues. You do realize that if that is so, you must declare such a conflict on your userpage. Beyond that, I'm not going to get involved in whether you go through AFC or move the article directly to main space.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:03, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- I have noted on my user page that I am an unpaid volunteer for the Green Party of Canada. If your intent was to make me feel unwelcome, you've done a good job. Thank you for your time. Greenbound (talk) 13:25, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks
Seeing you comment at the odd SPI makes me happy and appreciative that you're still helping out despite the prior unpleasantness. Figured saying it outloud has some benefits :) TonyBallioni (talk) 06:32, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
- Tony, you're one of the few who is willing to comment publicly; it's a lovely blend of honesty and deftness.
prior unpleasantness
- now there's an interesting characterization of what happened. Here's hoping your RL is going well.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:30, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
73.148.161.187 is back
If you have a moment to take a look, 73.148.161.187 (talk) has resumed their edit warring on sandal and flip-flops after their EW block expired. Thanks! --Chris (talk) 16:45, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
- Blocked for longer this time. Back to you.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:58, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks! --Chris (talk) 17:06, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
G12
Hi, Bbb23, I'm very pleased to see you back among us, it pained me to see you leave. If you decline a G12 nomination, would you please make sure you do something to actually remove the copyvio, and not just leave it there as you did at Draft:Ronnie Coffman? Blanking and listing at WP:CP, reverting to a non-infringing version or simply removing the offending text all work, leaving it for someone else to deal with really does not. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:23, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Justlettersandnumbers: I didn't think anything needed to be done based on the matching phrases. However, I'll ask an expert: Diannaa?--Bbb23 (talk) 22:34, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- Well, did you actually run a check? You should have seen this result – practically a whole paragraph copied word-for-word. That coupled with the WP:UPE might have been enough for you to seriously consider deletion as proposed, but I do understand that our perceptions are not necessarily identical. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:43, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- I saw it also; an entire paragraph copied.— Diannaa (talk) 22:46, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking care of it.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:49, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Justlettersandnumbers: I think I should say something more than just thanks, which, on reflection, sounds dismissive. I'm sorry I missed the paragraph; perhaps I need stronger glasses. :-) In any event, in the future, if a G12 tag requires that much inspection, I'll let another administrator look at it. Take care.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:12, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- Well, that's very nice of you, but really I was perfectly happy with the thanks. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:46, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello Bbb23, please copy the article along with the talk page to the draft, I will rewrite and prepare the article and prove that it fully meets the criteria. --Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 09:41, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Elshad Iman (Elşad İman): I will move it to draft space with the clear understanding that you must submit the draft through WP:AFC after you have worked on it; do you agree to that?--Bbb23 (talk) 00:30, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Bbb23: Yes, I agree --Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 08:53, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- Done see Draft:Pomegranate Producers and Exporters Association of Azerbaijan. Good luck.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:20, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Bbb23: Yes, I agree --Elshad Iman (Elşad İman) (talk) 08:53, 11 July 2021 (UTC)