User talk:Black Kite/Archive 94

2014 Isla Vista Killings

Can I ask what is wrong with the edits I did? A lot of the sources were unreliable, a lot of information was missing and outdated, and it just needed to be updated. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 23:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand how Rodger can't be notable. He is the one who shot the incel community into the mainstream and has made people inspired to do attacks like his almost ten years later. [1] [2] [3] [4] There are multiple articles talking about his mental health [5] [6] [7] [8] and Rodger's rampage also inspired and made women talk about sexism and misogyny and stared the hashtag #YesAllWomen. [9] [10] [11] [12]. He also caused the hashtag #NotAllMen, where men said they didn't have the same viewpoints like Rodger and wouldn't murder women because of it. [13] [14] [15] [16]. They also looked into his online life and how he was racist, hated women and talked bad about them, and was already looking to murder these poor college students [17] [18][19]. His rampage also brought forward more calls for gun control and inspired multiple laws that are now enacted [20] [21][22] [23]. Also talked about how mental health sources needed to be updated as well [24] [25] [26]. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 23:05, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

• You might want to review the previous discussions at the various talk pages, and also WP:BIO1E. Black Kite (talk) 10:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

  I understand about needing a discussion for making an article on Elliot Rodger, but why do I need a discussion when updating the article by adding reliable sources and information that was missing on the 2014 Isla Vista killings article? A lot of the sources like IMBD on the article are unreliable and the article is messy. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 06:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

  Because there were previous discussions that suggested it didn't need a separate article (indeed, the redirect was protected at one point because people kept reinstating it). If you don't have a discussion about it, people are going to keep on redirecting it because that was the status quo. Notability isn't an issue here - it's merely where the information on Rodger should be. Black Kite (talk) 07:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

  I understand that. I started a discussion and will see where it heads. I was just asking about the 2014 Isla Vista killings. I wanted to update the information and remove unreliable sources, but you said that also needed a discussion. I was just wondering why I needed to talk with editors about updating the article.Shoot for the Stars (talk) 07:22, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

  If there are unreliable sources in the article it is fine to remove them (well, replace them) just make sure your edit summary is clear. Black Kite (talk) 11:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

  I tried to but you reverted all my edits and said in the edit summary. “Hang on , we need a discussion about this. The article has been stable for some time.” So I’m just asking you why I need a discussion to make the article better? Shoot for the Stars (talk) 03:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Does this violate a policy/guideline or am I over reacting?

Hello, I ran across the user page of Yfyyejgjwguj a few days ago and noticed a few things that seemed like they may not be allowed on a users page but didn't want to rush to one of the noticeboards without confirmation.

The user page is mainly a link repository, and further down is mostly gore and porn links. While I could care less what people look at on their own it doesn't seem like it should be linked on a user page. Is this a WP:UPNOT issue, or are user pages for whatever a user wishes to keep on them and granted more freedom?

I appreciate any help or advice you could give, and thank you in advance.

Awshort (talk) 08:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

• Awshort Yeah, that's not acceptable (and some of the stuff is frankly blockable). I've deleted every remotely dubious link on the userpage, revision deleted everything, and warned the user. Black Kite (talk) 09:54, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

  Is the user in question not a sock of the currently indefinitely blocked User:Vwqvj qwhiu? Their user pages seem to be identical, and describes pages created by User:Vwqvj qwhiu as creater by User:Yfyyejgjwguj. 131.111.5.158 (talk) 18:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

  User now appears to have been blocked by Jpgordon. Just wondering if there was a reason you ignored my query Black Kite? Was genuinely just trying to be helpful! 131.111.5.160 (talk) 11:38, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

2014 Isla Vista Killings discussion

I have tried creating an WP:RfC and that was reverted. I also tried getting a WP:third opinion but that was also reverted. What can I do to change to update the article? A lot of the information is outdated and needs some major updating. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 23:16, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Reminder to vote now to select members of the first U4C

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wikimedian,

You are receiving this message because you previously participated in the UCoC process.

This is a reminder that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) ends on May 9, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 23:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

request for double-check

I promise I'm not trying to rope you into a discussion I'm having, but I want to ask if you'd evaluate my own arguments and ensure I'm presenting myself accurately.

At this AN/I now-archive, I was taken to task by an IP editor for writing the article suicide of Louis Conradt (from scratch) and then redirecting Louis Conradt (what I characterized as a WP:BIO1E). You said that I'd done nothing wrong because 90% of that biography was about the [event] (there are only a couple of sentences about his life before that, and none of those provided any real notability per BIO). I am sure that if that article had been only that section and nominated for deletion, it would have been deleted. Thus, his notability lies purely in the [event], and that is what we now have. I recently wrote the article Press Your Luck scandal from scratch and redirected the article Michael Larson thereto. I'm receiving the very same pushback from another single editor, though not an IP and with much more experience on the project.

Would you mind looking at Michael Larson (the BIO1E, where my redirection was undone, but is otherwise unchanged), Press Your Luck scandal, and the discussion at Talk:Press Your Luck scandal#Separate articles? (a) Am I correct in making the same arguments there that you did back in Jan 2023, and (b) if so, am I articulating myself and those rationales properly? Again, I'm not asking you to 'slide up in there and put your thing down' (to quote fine art); I'm watching here if you wouldn't mind just auditing me and my actions/words. If you do mind, that's completely fair—it's a big ask, but I'll still watch here for you to say 'no', if you don't mind. Thanks for your time and gracious patience — Fourthords | =Λ= | 02:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you

It had dragged out, and seemed to be some sort of dragged out nightmare, thanks for your action. JarrahTree 12:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Gudrun Ure

On 17 May 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Gudrun Ure, which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 03:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Deletion review for Ed Winters

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ed Winters. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Gottagotospace (talk) 14:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

G6 deletion of D4-D

Hi, while looking at Wikipedia:Database reports/Possibly out-of-process deletions, I saw you deleted D4-D as G6 ("Housekeeping and routine (non-controversial) cleanup: already moved to draftspace, unsourced").
I am curious as to how this works with WP:DRAFTOBJECT, as I thought recreating a draft in mainspace was considered to be an objection and meant that the article should go through a full AfD? Sorry for the confusion! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 00:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

• The article had been moved to Draft as it was unsourced, where it had been declined by AfC reviewers (twice) for that reason; however it was then identically created in mainspace again by the same user. It was this one that I deleted, as the user (who has since been blocked for persistent sockpuppetry) was clearly just being disruptive. It wasn't the only article that they did this with, all of which were completely unsourced. Black Kite (talk) 10:02, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

  From what I understand, even if an article is unsourced, recreating it in mainspace still counts as WP:DRAFTOBJECT and it should've been sent to AfD, right? I don't really see where G6 fits into this. If the user was a sock of a previously banned sockpuppet, G5 could've worked, but otherwise (even if it wasn't a big loss) it seems like a case of WP:NOTG6 (which includes Articles that were moved to draft space and then cut-and-paste moved back to mainspace). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

• I know you can't see the history, but what I deleted was only a redirect to the Draft. The user had edit-warred with another admin to restore the article even after it had been draftified, and it was then restored by another new account (and reverted by that same admin). Perhaps G6 was the wrong code, but we were merely tidying up after disruption and the article was never going back into mainspace in its current state. Black Kite (talk) 10:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

  My bad, I thought you deleted the whole article! Works fine then, no worries, although R2 is usually the way to go to delete redirects to drafts! (G6 is often misapplied so I was a bit weary but seems like the deletion was well-justified!) Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:09, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Rob Burrow

On 3 June 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Rob Burrow, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Schwede66 01:54, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

regarding Canada–India diplomatic row

User:Mfarazbaig is removing the redirect from Canada–India diplomatic row which is whole copied from 2023 Canada–India diplomatic row despite rejected for split. 2402:A00:152:85D3:F40E:4A37:45B:2FD2 (talk) 16:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

• Thank you. Dealt with. Black Kite (talk) 17:40, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Karen Black and related

Hallo - they have returned again: [27] 93.216.100.71 (talk) 16:40, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For taking care of the Dopenguins sockpuppetry. I appreciate it. JeffSpaceman (talk) 10:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Draftify SurrealDB

Hello @Black Kite I noticed you deleted the SurrealDB page after it was initially sent to draft space after a deletion discussion, but a user moved it back into mainspace.

Could you please recover the original page and contents, and place it back into draft space as I'd like to continue working on this article in the future, as I believe it will eventually gain more notability.

please feel free to leave a draft notice on the page so that a user does not move it back onto the mainspace Mr Vili talk 18:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

• Mr vili Draft:SurrealDB. Black Kite (talk) 19:08, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

  @Black Kite thank you. It appears the page had been significantly altered from what I last saw, is it possible to restore the edit history? Mr Vili talk 00:19, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

• * Mr vili Try it again now. Black Kite (talk) 07:08, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Matija Sarkic

On 15 June 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Matija Sarkic, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:47, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Kevin Campbell (footballer)

On 19 June 2024, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Kevin Campbell (footballer), which you nominated and updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 10:47, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

New message from Red-tailed hawk

Hello, Black Kite. You have new messages at Wikipedia:AE.
Message added 05:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

AE

I posted about that to Red-tailed hawk earlier but I'm not sure when they will be back online. I don't think a TB will be sufficient, but maybe. Some sanction is needed. Doug Weller talk 10:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Not an apology, but more like a "you were right, I was wrong"

Should have known better, I guess. On those rare occasions when I disagree with you, I think, well Black Kite can't be perfect all the time. That ... is apparently not what happened here. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:25, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

• Floquenbeam Haha, perhaps. But you were still right to try, because you never know with these... Black Kite (talk) 19:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

User

User @Josephruela: could be user @Fa30sp:. See history page of 2025 FIFA Club World Cup. Island92 (talk) 14:53, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Newv edit war occurred. Previously, user Fa30sp was prevented from editing this page for the same reason. Island92 (talk) 15:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Blocked. Black Kite (talk) 19:03, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Let’s talk

Let’s talk about why you took away my phrase that is accurate that says Uruguay won a hat-trick of world titles. What is the point of taking that away? It’s true. This is shown via a photo in the fifa museum in Zurich, Switzerland. That “twitter post” still exists on X but you saw the photo. You know the FIFA museum says this, and yet you still want to take away credit from Uruguay as winning a hat-trick of world titles. Why? Please re-instate it back on their page. You don’t even need a reference to put that true sentence.Truefacts24 (talk) 13:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

Summer Olympics Football

You deleted my summer Olympics work and said “ That's an interesting take on it, but it's going to need a discussion at the talk page before such wide-ranging changes”

Why does my correct history need to be discussed but the version of it before which I fixed which is incorrect information with less official sources doesn’t need discussion to be there? Please explain. Truefacts24 (talk) 13:32, 19 July 2024 (UTC)

That golfer pic

Is a poor quality scan from YouTube, and it has noticeable artefacts. That's why I protected it but didn't end up using it. Stephen 04:09, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Skyliners Drum and Bugle Corps

Could you please clarify for me what was it about this article that was a copyright violation? Thank you so much! Bgsu98 (Talk) 17:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I came here as well to ask this... A list of show summaries is not a copyright violation in any manner. (Considering that, since they are fact, they are uncopyrightable.) (Why? I Ask (talk) 17:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Regarding the lists - I was being careful, because there is a column for "score", which per WP:CLIST I took to be "calculations which are themselves based upon numbers created by value judgements". I presume the lists would be OK without that column. I might actually be completely wrong, in which case I am happy to undelete the revisions. Let me know. Black Kite (talk) 18:19, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

It is a sport-like activity. The score is what is given to the corps at the end of the season by a panel of judges, similar to figure skating or diving. Those are allowed because it is a fact that the governing body gave the group such a score. Why? I Ask (talk) 18:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Why? I Ask. These scores are no different than scores assigned for any number of sporting events, like figure skating, gymnastics, diving, etc. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:58, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

OK, I will undelete them. No problem. And done. Black Kite (talk) 19:25, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Mind you, I'm looking at these mostly unsourced articles and thinking "is text like The fledgling corps endured the expected growing pains that accompanied the transition in those first few years, but a top notch instructional staff... suitable"? Black Kite (talk) 19:34, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Most of the drum corps articles absolutely suck and are rife with fancruft. We have been working to clean them up and add sources. (See something like the Crossmen). Why? I Ask (talk) 19:44, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Why? I Ask Yes, I've noticed! By the way, I've removed all the copyvio from the Hawthorne article, it can be edited again now. Black Kite (talk) 19:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Hawthorne Caballeros Drum and Bugle Corps is still showing edit suppression. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes, those are the revisions that had the prose copyvios in them. If you want a copy of one, let me know. Black Kite (talk) 01:56, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I didn’t realize the prose had been ripped off. Thank you for clarifying! Bgsu98 (Talk) 08:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

BTW, I've been tending to the tables, while Why? I Ask has been tending to the (atrocious) prose. Too many people treat these articles like they're fan wikis. Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:50, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Contrast

Hi there! I guess you didn't see my reply in my talk page, but I've created a color pattern myself, where they all pass contrast checker on either black or blue texts. Could you take a look to see if it's okay to use it, please? Thank you, BRDude⁷⁰ (talk) 12:47, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Truefacts24's Talk Page

I'm hoping I could get you to change your mind about this editor's final comment to their talk page. I appreciate what you're trying to do by restoring and in most cases I would agree with it. God knows I've come across enough cases in my role as an SPI clerk where I wished other admins had documented their work better. In this case, however, the use of a homophobic slur pushes over the edge, for me, into something that should be removed. It's not just abusive towards you, but to an entire class of people, so I have to agree with Jdcomix's assessment that almost no one needs to see that, and the few people that potentially do need to see it (ie admins evaluating an unblock request) will find it even if it's been removed. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:00, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

• Fair enough - I'll remove it and replace it with a link for any UTRS admin. Black Kite (talk) 09:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Swansscrew.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Swansscrew.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)