User talk:Boing! said Zebedee/Archive 29

Archive 25

←

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

→

Archive 35

October 2017

Administrators' newsletter – October 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2017).

Administrator changes

Boing! said Zebedee • Ansh666 • Ad Orientem

Tonywalton • AmiDaniel • Silence • BanyanTree • Magioladitis • Vanamonde93 • Mr.Z-man • Jdavidb • Jakec • Ram-Man • Yelyos • Kurt Shaped Box

Guideline and policy news

• Following a successful proposal to create it, a new user right called "edit filter helper" is now assignable and revocable by administrators. The right allows non-administrators to view the details of private edit filters, but not to edit them.
• Following a discussion about mass-application of ECP and how the need for logging and other details of an evolving consensus may have been missed by some administrators, a rough guide to extended confirmed protection has been written. This information page describes how the extended-confirmed aspects of the protection policy are currently being applied by administrators.

Technical news

• You can now search for IP ranges at Special:Contributions. Some log pages and Special:DeletedContributions are not yet supported. Wildcards (e.g. 192.168.0.*) are also not supported, but the popular contribsrange gadget will continue to work.

Arbitration

• Community consultation on the 2017 candidates for CheckUser and Oversight has concluded. The Arbitration Committee will appoint successful candidates by October 11.
• A request for comment is open regarding the structure, rules, and procedures of the December 2017 Arbitration Committee election, and how to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Help

Can you move back Draft talk:Holly Neher too. WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 22:48, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Hmm, that was weird. I definitely checked the "move talk page too" option but it didn't do it - I've done it separately now. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:52, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Boing

hi there, would you please consider updating your userpage, thanks Govindaharihari (talk) 18:28, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Ah, I'd forgotten about that message - thanks for reminding me! Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:06, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Image copyright Violation

Hi Boing!

Ive uploaded an image under this URL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:11HYBRIDLOGO.jpg this is our branding logo, and has been detected by wikipedia for a copyright violation, all of the material i have posted on Draft:HybridTheory belongs to my self and my production partner, the write up on our soundcloud was written by my self and we use this on all forms of social media, this is our background and history, how do i get around our write up being removed again & our logo from being removed for a copyright violation ?

thanks for your time john walsh — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnBWalsh (talk • contribs) 23:49, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

@JohnBWalsh and Diannaa: I don't really know anything about copyright of company logos, especially those that are just words in a specific font, so I've pinged Diannaa who knows a lot about copyright to see if she can help. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:52, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Copyright law in the UK is pretty strict for logos; even ones with simple fonts are considered to be copyright, and this one is not simple. If you are the copyright holder and wish to release this logo under license, there's instructions at Commons:OTRS. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:11, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

@Diannaa: I am not sure that is the best answer to the question being asked. @JohnBWalsh: especially if Hybrid Theory is intended to be a commercial -- money-making -- operation, then you may prefer not to release its logo for free use by anyone else including allowing anyone else to use it, including to make money out of it, without paying anything to you. That would be the effect of releasing the logo under license as suggested as above.

If you choose not to do that, then the alternative would be for Wikipedia to use a "non-free" copy of the logo on a Wikipedia article about Hybrid Theory. Such a non-free copy could only be uploaded after the Wikipedia article is accepted, not while it is still a Draft. But the difference would be that you would retain all of your rights over the logo. We can help you with the upload process if and after the article about Hybrid Theory is accepted. MPS1992 (talk) 21:48, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of disruptive editor's .whatevers?

Hello Boing! A few weeks ago you indeffed User talk:Wikipexiah for IAR and disruption. Going through NPP I came across the host of stylesheet pages which they created (This.js, that.css, full list), so many that I doubt en.WP needs to keep them forever. Because noone but the creator can edit those pages, I can't CSD them, so am asking you as the blocking admin if they ought to be mass deleted as basically spam? If I have offended thee by leaving the "_said_Zebedee" part of my greeting I am sorry;') Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) 02:58, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Ah yes, they were all either completely blank or just had a signature in them (certainly no js or css). Some of their submitted drafts (and unblock requests) had been similarly blank too, so I really have no idea what they were trying to do here. I've deleted them all now. (Oh, and most people just call me Boing! - or worse ;-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Crboyer

You forgot to sign your vote ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:48, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, just spotted that when I expanded on it a little - thanks. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:50, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

One more...

I feel somehow that your warning was not taken seriously. Regards. Only in death does duty end (talk) 08:55, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I've imposed a six-month block. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:04, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello. On a related note, if an editor is blocked from editing their User Page, are they allowed to circumvent the block by using a Meat Puppet? It looks like this has happened here (translation: can you do me a favor and reset my user page in the en: wiki to the version of July 29, 20:25? I can not edit my own user page). Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 12:49, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Well, we can't really do anything about what he does on de.wiki, and it's perhaps a bit naughty for someone else to edit their user page - but in this case I don't see any real problem reverting it to the "Retired and gone away" version - I'd have done it for him had he emailed me. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:54, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for your advice. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 01:22, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Counting

Hopefully someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you can force the software to count zero if there's any content in the section whatsoever. But IIRC, if you remove the count from the first !vote, then it counts the next "#" as "one", instead of counting it as two. GMG^talk 12:08, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Yep, that makes sense - we just need the next neutral to start with a # again. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

To speedy & Unhelpful

The page premier cottages that you have now deleted and to which a speedy deletion notice was applied only 2 hours after it was created, was still being constructed - I think a simply message in the first instance would be a more constructive approach if somebody has concerns. Premier Cottages occupies a large sector of the industry it serves and is hugely important to many people, it forms an integral part of an existing Wikipedia resource 'UK Tourism' that was lacking and whereas I see the page needed completing it does sit with the myriad of other company pages that make up this resource of information.

Please reinstate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bulverton (talk • contribs) 16:04, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I've explained the problem with it on your talk page. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:13, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

User talk:Timothy McGuire

Have you gotten any response regarding User talk:Timothy McGuire? If the blocking admin is no longer active, I concur that the user can be unblocked per WP:ROPE. If you don't get to it, I can do it shortly. --Jayron32 20:16, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

The problem is it's a CheckUser block and only a CheckUser can approve an unblock - Materialscientist does appear to be active, so I'll try an email. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:29, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Biddle and Smart article

Boy that was quick. You nominated on 15 Oct and then when I went to contest deletion on the same day, it was already gone. How much time did you give it? It looks like the speedy deletion proposal was made at 7 am today and when I went to contest it around 2 pm it was already gone. I wrote this article along with two other articles in an attempt to give more coverage to the once-thriving automobile body manufacturing businesses of Amesbury, Massachusetts. I clearly cited the source. If the text was too close to the original sources, I could have easily modified the text so that it wasn't plagiarism. Is there any way someone can restore the article for a few days so that I can fix it?? I went through the effort of linking about half a dozen pages about early automobile manufacturers. It would be a shame to have to re-do those links instead of just being given a chance to edit what had been there. Thanks.

Cbmccarthy (talk) 18:18, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

It was a clear copyright violation, with parts of the original text simply re-ordered, and those have to be removed as soon as we are aware of them (for legal reasons). And a copyright violation can not be restored, even temporarily, sorry. If you want to create a new version, you should really write it from scratch in your own words - you can work from the original source on your own computer, but you should not put any of it on Wikipedia until it is clear of copyright violation. I can, however, extract the sources for you, but there were only two in that article...

1. A MICROCOSMIC HISTORY OF THE CARRIAGE INDUSTRY OF THE UNITED STATES-A FEW LEADING CARRIAGE CENTERS, Hub October 1897
2. Entry for Biddle & Smart, Coachbuilt website, http://www.coachbuilt.com/bui/b/biddle_smart/biddle_smart.htm

I hope that's some help. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:34, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

I think you're exaggerating and I would dispute that it was "a clear copyright violation" - for one thing, it was just a stub with key information. If it only had key facts, there was not much room for copious cut-and-paste. Date of founding, main products, founder's name, key customers, year company went out of business. Of the five or six sentences in the article, the majority of the sentences were written by me, a few probably tracked the word order of the source (which I cited). These could have been easily fixed if you had given me more than a few hours notice. I think the legal risk you use to justify not giving me any time is exaggerated as well. The source article is easily 100 lines and 98 of them didn't end up in my article. I was in good faith and have been writing Wikipedia articles for twelve years. Heavy-handed "drive-by" use of speedy delete is worse than any vandalism, and should be used with more care. It makes authors not want to contribute anymore.Cbmccarthy (talk) 13:30, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Firstly, I apologize if my previous words suggest to you that I did not consider you to be writing in good faith - I have no doubt that you were and are. And I can understand the frustration you must feel. But I have just re-examined the version of the article that was deleted as a copyright violation. Though it was indeed only a very short article (actually of about a dozen sentences), five of its sentences were copied directly from the http://www.coachbuilt.com source with no modification - I could not check the sentence cited to the hard copy source and I have not checked the paraphrasing/originality of the rest of it. I appreciate you would have continued to rework it to rewrite those sentences, but I'm afraid that Wikipedia policy does not allow that. If you want to take copyrighted text and rework/paraphrase it, you must do that on your own computer before you submit it to Wikipedia. You might think that leaving it for a few hours would be fine, but this is one of the world's most visited web sites, and copyright violations really do need to be removed on sight. I know it's tough, but that's Wikipedia policy, sorry. I'm pleased to see a new version of the article is in progress. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:05, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Editor

Hi Boing! said Zebedee,

It seems that Biografer has not learn from past experience that removing archive links just because they are not dead is not helpful at all. Is there a way you can explain it to them better? Also, is this comment appropriate from this? -- 1989 23:21, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

I'll be talking to them later. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:01, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

You missed something... -- 1989 19:19, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry about the delay in responding, but I don't think it would be productive to critique every possible mistake at this point. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:07, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Blocked account

• I'm confused, it says here that the account doesn't exist, and when I checked their contributions, I didn't see a block notice, which is why I assume Kharkiv07 removed a maintenance category from their talk page saying they were blocked. -- 1989 15:13, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

  It's from 2015 before unified logins were complete, so I'm guessing that's why it doesn't show at Special:CentralAuth. The reason there's no en.wiki block shown is that it's a Global Lock - it shows on the Block User page which is only visible for admins. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:12, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Because mopping up morons all day must sure create a powerful thirst. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 09:59, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks :-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:00, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry about generating all the notifications on your talk page, hopefully you don't mind. Cheers! Alex Shih^Talk 07:47, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Hehe, no problem. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:17, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

SO comment

You can just add BlackAmerican's comment as is. Referring to me as a male is not the worst thing he has done to me so I have no issue.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 14:10, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

OK, will do. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:11, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		I have been watching the Biografer situation from afar, and I think that you have handled things pretty well. Your recent post is almost exactly what I try to do when I welcome new users. Thank you! -- Dolotta (talk) 16:53, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, that's very kind. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:37, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Deleted Page Question

I received a note from you on my deleted page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lisa_Dinhofer. It was deleted cause it was similar to the content I have written on Amazon here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mastering-Colored-Pencil-Essential-Techniques/dp/1580934927. I can remove that content if needed and make changes but how do I get to see the last version of my draft before it was deleted. I don't have a copy. Cupcakesriots (talk) 16:02, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Cupcakesriots: I have to go out now for an hour or two, but I'll have a look when I get back - I see you have email enabled, so one possibility would be for me to email it to you. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:51, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

@Cupcakesriots: I've emailed a copy of the source text of your deleted draft to you. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:56, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

thank you. I will review and make the updates/changes that were suggested. Cupcakesriots (talk) 19:02, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

User:MrX2077

Thanks for getting involved with that unblock request. Looking back on the user's edit history there is a severe competence issue (continually asked for mediation, which was declined, over and over again) and it seems almost every edit they've ever made has been reverted for one reason or another. Well I'll let the block run and see what happens when they return and keep an eye on them. Hopefully this run in will allow them to consider a more collaborative approach. Canterbury Tail talk 12:49, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

He does seem unable to listen and quickly gets confrontational, doesn't he? The whole thing he's arguing about looks like blatant OR anyway. But yes, I think just letting the block run and then keeping an eye on things is the best we can do - I'll keep watching too. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:54, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

It's complete trivia at best. I've come across many TV and movies that have had a line along the lines of "use the force" but you don't see them all written up in the Star Wars article. Incidental connection at best, pure trivia. Canterbury Tail talk 12:58, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Hilarious about your name though. :) Canterbury Tail talk 12:59, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Hehe, yes, I thought so :-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:07, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and I'm sure I remember an old physics teacher many years ago helping us with a problem and telling us to "use the force" - long before anyone bar his Mum had heard of George Lucas ;-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Nfitz

I hope you don't mind me asking for help on this case, as this is clearly going to be time sink, but it saddens me to just walk away. User:Nfitz has been blocked indefinitely for NOTHERE since October 14 following a sequence of bizarre events. The block was reasonable (there were two concerns, one was addressed later, and the other one was topic ban violation). After I consulted with the blocking admin, initially I was planning to open a thread at WP:AN after some time to discuss the NOTHERE rationale, and also to discuss the block length. However, the subsequent development on User:Nfitz's talk page makes it difficult to do anything now. I was wondering if you have any advice for this situation. Many thanks, Alex Shih^Talk 18:28, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Wow, yes, I vaguely remember all those words. I'll have a look as soon as I can and see if I can come up with any ideas. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:30, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Frany90

Hi Boing, I've just stumbled across User_talk:Frany90. I think you were intending to return to the unblock request there but it looks like it is still open. Might be deliberate on your part but it's not really your style so I thought I'd give you a nudge. - Sitush (talk) 19:23, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, after Spiff's reply I want to talk to him first, but I haven't had a lot of time - I'll try to get on to it tomorrow. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:29, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Hubris

That will teach me to tease my fellow admins - sorry for buggering your talkpage up temporarily! Yunshui ^雲_水 09:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Ah, two folks who both work on unblock requests with names beginning with Y? How's an old man supposed to keep track? ;-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:30, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Well, mostly I use the subsequent letters... Yunshui ^雲_水 09:32, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Like Alex Shih^Talk 09:59, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Hehe. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:00, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Quad/Graphics page updates

Hello Boing! said Zebedee -- Our apologies for attempting to post new Quad/Graphics information incorrectly. I am a complete beginner to Wikipedia and did not understand its mission, its rules or how placing content on it works. The Quad/Graphics page is very outdated and contains information that is no longer accurate. Most of the references are no longer available. I have reviewed the Citing Sources info about Wikipedia but find it quite lengthy and a little confusing. Is the Quad 10-K annual report, which is publicly available, a verifiable source that can be cited? I have been assigned to update the page but don't want to do anything that would cause you to block us. I used some language from our website, QG.com, thinking that what appears on Wikipedia should mirror what is on our website. I did not suspect it would be viewed as a copyright issue. Jeff Waalkes Quad/Graphics Corporate Communications Quadwikimaster (talk) 21:15, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

I'll be busy for the next few hours, but I'll get back to you later. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:08, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

@Quadwikimaster: Sorry I didn't get back to you yet, I've had a couple of very busy days - but I haven't forgotten. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:03, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Boing -- on a related note, what are your thoughts about Quadwikimaster's user name? At first glance, it looks like an implied shared use issue. -- Dolotta (talk) 19:43, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that's something I want to talk to him about - it sounds like a role account, so I intend to suggest changing it. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:03, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Quad/Graphics page

Hi again -- I will certainly change my username if it is questionable. It was nothing more than a thought I had. In fact, why don't you do whatever you have to do to eliminate it, and I will re-register. Quadwikimaster (talk) 21:22, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Don't worry about it for now - if you're not making any edits it doesn't really matter. It's late where I am now and I'm heading off to bed, but I'll try to talk to you tomorrow - I suggest you keep this account for now so I know where to find you, and I can rename it for you after we've had a talk. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:33, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Strange

What you say you were expecting in this edit is exactly what I was expecting too. All of us make mistakes, and I cannot begin to understand why anyone would think swearing that black is white and the sun is freezing cold in order to deny that one is capable of making a mistake is better than saying "I made a mistake, I'll put it right. Thanks for pointing it out to me". The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it's incomprehensible behaviour. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:39, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

October 2017

Thank you. I was tired of trying to reason with them. Why they would get so worked up over half a sentence is beyond me.Sumanuil (talk) 5:06 am, Today (UTC+5.5)

Moved to the talk page. Sumanuil, the place for messages is here, on the user talk page. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 04:47, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it's surprising how people can get so abusive over really minor things in life. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:42, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Request

Hello, I just need to say that as you unblocked a user named Timothy McGuire, it also has a sockpuppet named Emma Morano 1899-2017. Timothy McGuire appolagised for wrong acts. Emma Morano 1899-2017 also appolagised for wrong acts and will contribute productively so please unblock User:Emma Morano 1899-2017. Thank you. 106.202.47.198 (talk) 12:28, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Firstly, I don't see that any connection has been made between User:Timothy McGuire and User:Emma Morano 1899-2017, and I also don't see where User:Emma Morano 1899-2017 has offered any apologies. So how do you know those things? For a request to unblock User:Emma Morano 1899-2017 to be considered, that request must be made by the operator of that account, logged in, at User talk:Emma Morano 1899-2017. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:39, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

User:Mark & Salem

Hello, we just recently noticed that you chose to delete our contribution Blue Fizzy Pop under the assumption that it is a hoax. We want to inform you that it is anything but a hoax and we plan to re-contribute it in the future. Although it is something no one knows about it, in accordance with it's name, it has been created as a new "kink" or fantasy created by me and a partner that will hopefully be realized and used out in today's world with the name we have given it as the creators. If you have a concern or stipulation please let us know. Mark & Salem (talk) 04:10, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

It's not appropriate for a user page - see WP:User pages for a guide to what a user page is for. And if it's something no one knows about it, then it won't be reliably sourced (see WP:RS for what reliable sources are) and so is not appropriate anywhere on Wikipedia. Finally, as your account appears to be operated by more than one person I am going to block it, as Wikipedia accounts are for individual editors only. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:44, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Replacement of disputed notification

As mentioned there, I have replaced a disputed notification [1]. Since the purpose of the notification is simply to inform others of the discussion, my replacement notification serves the same purpose and does not get into the tricky issue of modifying the text of a signed post nor in preserving the text which has been called canvassing. I don't see that there is any text in the section I deleted which either relates to how to improve the RD, or is necessary for notifying people about the ANI discussion, or even helps us grow as a community. I did mention the earlier discussion I removed since otherwise people may get confused or complain, but intentionally did not provide a history link. If people look it up, that's their choice. I don't see there is much better we can do now which isn't going to just result in more dispute. In other words, either we leave it at that, or we risk blowing up the dispute even more, perhaps to the extent of derailing the ANI discussion. The choice is yours. I'm leaving this message on the talk page of everyone who participated in the section I removed. Nil Einne (talk) 11:17, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Good solution, thanks. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:24, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Restore to userspace?

Hi! Some students I'm monitoring moved their work live, but made a mistake in the process - they ended up moving the content to a userspace page, User:Immigration to the United States. I believe that they meant to add it to one of the existing articles, but got confused. Could you restore this and move it back to User:Hengle/sandbox? I didn't want to do it myself under my main account without asking you. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:47, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Shalor (Wiki Ed): Done, moved it back to the sandbox. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:50, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Saw you were on the job, thanks. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:51, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks guys! You guys are on top of this! :) Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:29, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Talking about speedy

Thumbs up by Wakalani

Found out that you already deleted the redirect while previewing my notification for the original creator, talking about fast.

Well thank you for knowing who to count on

Happy to help :-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:51, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Archive 25

←

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

→

Archive 35

November 2017

Administrators' newsletter – November 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2017).

Administrator changes

Longhair • Megalibrarygirl • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93

Allen3 • Eluchil404 • Arthur Rubin • Bencherlite

Technical news

• The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team is creating an "Interaction Timeline" tool that intends to assist administrators in resolving user conduct disputes. Feedback on the concept may be posted on the talk page.
• A new function is now available to edit filter managers that will make it easier to look for multiple strings containing spoofed text.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors will be invited to submit candidate statements for the 2017 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 12 until November 21. Voting will begin on November 27 and last until December 10.
• Following a request for comment, Ritchie333, Yunshui and Ymblanter will serve as the Electoral Commission for the 2017 ArbCom Elections.

Obituaries

• The Wikipedia community has recently learned that Allen3 (William Allen Peckham) passed away on December 30, 2016, the same day as JohnCD. Allen began editing in 2005 and became an administrator that same year.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:49, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Jonny Craig Wikipedia

I made a recent edit which you immediately reversed even though I have proof to back my claim up. It would be very ignorant to say it can't be that because he doesn't look that way biologically.. Transgenders are also a genuine thing and so was the change I made. I can provide you said proof. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soapsearcher (talk • contribs) 10:28, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

User talk:Soapsearcher

You blocked this user after only one warning, and then when he provided a source you removed the source and his talk page access? It would seem that he has a reasonable (albeit far-fetched, but sources can fix that) point. Was the source he provided something completely irrelevant? RedPanda25 13:08, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

The source was an image of an alleged 2-line Twitter interaction, which in no way supported the claim made. It wasn't even a link to an actual Twitter feed, so it's impossible to tell if it was even genuine or who it actually came from if it was. It's just trolling. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:56, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Oh, and it wasn't me who removed the source link, it was User:Oshwah. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:57, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

mail. it gets you.

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

-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:47, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

A little joke I just thought of :)

Take it elsewhere
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Hello Please read what I wrote for fun, with a lighthearted tone. In WP:ANI, I wrote the following, in bold face: "I am not defending reactive incivility. Incivility is wrong. Incivility is a cancer." "I say the same thing again: Incivility is unacceptable; both SMcCandlish and FleetCommand must behave themselves." "We have no such policy as (pardon my language) Wikipedia:Be the lesser jerk! Our policies are Wikipedia:Civility and Meta:Don't be a jerk." After all this, you wrote: A massive breach of WP:NPA by FleetCommand gets not even a hint of disapproval from you In spite of all the above. You know what would have happened if SMcCandlish was in my place? He would have responded "Please see WP:ICANTHEARYOU and WP:FILIBUSTER" right in the middle of there. LOL. Seriously though, both must behave themselves: You and I never write what they wrote. Never. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 13:50, 3 November 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker) Codename Lisa, I've come across you only occasionally, because I mainly do image stuff, but each time I did see your name in that context it seemed to be you wanting to mark out some strange "line" in a "territory" you felt was "yours". You really should stop that kind of behaviour. -- Begoon 14:06, 3 November 2017 (UTC) @Begoon: Hi. If that is indeed the case, you will have my eternal gratitude if you come to my talk page and discuss it with me. I welcome rational discussion of my personal conduct, because I know full well that where there is no problem, there is no improvements either. —Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 15:37, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Quad/Graphics

Hi Boing! SZ - We are ready with a new hopefully neutral attempt at the Quad/Graphics pages. Are you able to help? I will be back in the office on Monday.Quadwikimaster (talk) 21:05, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry for not getting back to you before - been unexpectedly busy. I'll look over the weekend. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:13, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

selfe harm threat?

69.126.158.133 has made edits (dissalowed by filter) say, among other incoherence "I want to commite suicide" Tornado chaser (talk) 22:05, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to step on Boing!'s toes, but the section title caught my eye. That's just a run of the mill idiot vandal. The vandalism they were trying to add was in the actor's voice: (paraphrasing) "I want to commit suicide from my movie [insert actual movie name here], I sucked in that movie" kind of stuff. I've blocked them for a week. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:10, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Just being carful since they say to report any threat even if most likely not credible, thanks for blocking them. Tornado chaser (talk) 22:15, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

@Tornado chaser: I should have added: it's probably better to email emergency@wikimedia.org instead of reporting to an admin's page. If it needs further action in the real world, that's what the admin will do anyway, so you're saving some time. There is no harm in reporting things like this, which end up not really being threats, to the email address if you're not sure; they're trained to separate legit threats from normal vandalism. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:18, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

I would have done this except I have problems with my email. Tornado chaser (talk) 22:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Ah, OK. All good then. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:25, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

@Tornado chaser: if you need an oversight email, just drop a discrete note on my talk with the dif hidden discretely and I will deal with it if I'm online. I can always add the post to my OS request. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 22:41, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, P.S what is point at which I should request revdel rather than treating the edit as normal vandalism? I do a lot of anti-vandal patrolling and false rape accusations in a BLP are not uncommon and are becoming more common. Tornado chaser (talk) 22:46, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

It's a bit of a judgement call; in this particular case, since it was the edit filter and nothing ever made it to the history of the article, I'm inclined to not revdel, but that's just me: I'm 100% supportive of any admin (Dlohcierekim?) that feels differently. We do have the ability to revdel edit filter entries. If this same thing had actually been added to the article, I'd have probably revdel'd it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:51, 3 November 2017 (UTC) (adding:) I guess I didn't actually answer your question. Yes, in general I would suggest revdel for rape allegations that actually make it thru the edit filter. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:53, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Tornado chaser (talk) 23:02, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Chuckle. I would not know how. I was just speaking of the future. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 23:43, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Your close

Help me to understand this, please. You mean to tell me that I can unilaterally and repeatedly reverse XfD closures, refuse to discuss my actions, and tell everyone to "fuck off", and I'd be in the right and should be left alone? Because that is the precise order of what's happened here!

I think you misunderstood the issue. Nobody was offended by the use of the word "fuck", and I certainly was not calling for any action for something as trivial as that. Additionally, no one started hounding MP about his categories out of the blue--the whole exchange started after he decided to unilaterally revert a CfD closure. The issue is the user's disregard for consenus and, more concerning to me, his utterly unconstrained aggressiveness and disrespect toward other editors.

If we can't expect and require behavior more civilized than that of a wild dog growling over "his" territory, then we're well and truly fucked. Please revisit your closure. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 14:41, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

There was no admin action going to come of that, as countless attempts to enforce civility at WP:ANI and WP:AN have shown, so no I will not reverse my close. Just leave his talk page alone and you should be fine. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:46, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

If not AN/I, where should we address pursuing sanctions against this editor for ignoring consensus? VegaDark (talk) 16:15, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

You are not going to get any sanctions here, and I'm not going to spend a second more of my time on it. Can't you think of anything constructive to do to help us build our encyclopedia instead? Either way, please go away. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:24, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

<self-redacted>

(talk page stalker) I guess it's a generational thing. <sigh /> -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 06:01, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

• In case you have any further interest in this, the "consensus" these two editors claim to be enforcing was a consensus of two editors. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 23:48, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Just wanna say...

...I love your username! It's whimsical and fun. With regards, --Tenebrae (talk) 20:48, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm glad you like it :-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:41, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

World Of Weird

Just a quick heads up; I mid-air conflicted with you on this and reversed your deletion - it's a duplicate of World of Weird so I've redirected there. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:50, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Sure, that's fine. Curiously, my deletion doesn't show in the history, but it does show in my action log. A quirk of Wikimedia software, I guess. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Promotional tours

Hi Z - a list of upcoming tour dates is noncompliant with WP:NTOUR: A tour that meets notability standards does not make all tours associated with that artist notable. It is considered marketing/promotion. The tour may become notable after it ends and the tallies for attendance, coverage and monetary positions are calculated and analyzed. Simply listing dates for marketing purposes is promotion and should be deleted as such. Please reconsider your decision and save us all some time in AfD. Thank you! ^{Atsme📞📧} 14:18, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

WP:NTOUR is irrelevant, as lack of notability is not a valid Speedy Deletion reason - and WP:NTOUR says nothing to support a claim that an article about an upcoming tour is considered promotional and liable to speedy deletion. The outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PSA Tour was deletion due to lack of notability, so I don't see how that's relevant either - opinions that something is promotional expressed at AFD do not set policy. WP:G11 is all about style/neutrality/POV, and I see no non-neutral or promotional wording in the article. So I'm sorry, but I stand by my assessment. I can see valid notability grounds for WP:AFD, but not for speedy deletion - I know it can be frustrating, but valid CSD reasons are deliberately very limited for a purpose, and we should not bypass them to save time at AFD. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:40, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)(talk page stalker) I think Boing! made the correct decision. Now, I'm not arguing that the article should be kept because the topic is notable, but I don't think the article qualifies for speedy. G11 is for unambiguous promotion or advertising. I delete things nominated for G11 which say things such as "for the best foo, buy at fie.com" or "Our company is the most customer-focused provider of spinner-widgets in the market" or articles wherein the whole point is to blatantly promote/advertise. Please note that the criteria is "Unambiguous". Of course there is going to be different interpretations of what consists of "unambiguous" advertising, but I don't think you could call this advertising copy. Thanks for all your hard volunteer work here! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:45, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

As an aside. I often come across articles tagged with both A7 and G11 which do not contain any unambiguously promotional material, presumably on reasoning along the lines of "If x is not notable, the intent can only be promotion". G11 is specifically about content not about presumed intent, and I think that's a key point that is often misunderstood. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:18, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

The reason behind that thinking is WP:NOTPROMO, which is policy, and it says (my bold) Those promoting causes or events, or issuing public service announcements, even if noncommercial, should use a forum other than Wikipedia to do so. Ticketmaster comes to mind. G11 does apply to Unambiguous advertising or promotion which I believe applies in this case because there is no other feasible way to see the promotion of upcoming events as anything other than promotion simply for the fact that it's in the future, which also brings WP:BALL into play (my bold): Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Dates are not definite until the event actually takes place. Well, notability isn't inherited, so by what criteria is the event "notable" much less sourced to anything but promotional websites such as this one where you book a reservation to the concert. How is that not unambiguous promotion? ^{Atsme📞📧} 16:11, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

How many times do you need to be told that notability has absolutely nothing to do with it? Your argument that "there is no other feasible way to see the promotion of upcoming events as anything other than promotion" contains a blatant logic error, that of Begging the question. Now, you have had my answer, and I will not change it - so please take it elsewhere if you wish to contest my decision. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:22, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Gone. Thank you. ^{Atsme📞📧} 16:26, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) FWIW, I suspect I'm one of the harsher admins with respect to promotional content: and I would not have speedy-deleted this. I may have blanked the tour dates, but that's about all. Vanamonde (talk) 16:34, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

MechMaster Katzenstein

You warned this user about posting flashing videos as 'punishment' against vandals; they did it again this evening, so hopefully my warning was strong enough to tell them to stop it. Nate • (chatter) 05:32, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. But no, such behaviour is utterly unacceptable, and he doesn't get another second chance - I have blocked. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:40, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Wow, looking more closely, I see he did it several times at different user talk pages - and he'd done it prior to my warning too. I really don't think this is someone we want here. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:32, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

I honestly found them definitely not ready to edit here from a couple other run-ins on their edits, so good call here, especially as they pretty much made the situation on the page I was trying to control last night worse by goading the other user into multiple socks and added a half-hour by fighting them before we could finally fix the damage. I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but it obviously expired before either of us ever acted on their edits. Nate • (chatter) 15:15, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, as you see I found a lot of other problems too, and I suspect it's probably down to immaturity. I'd be willing to consider a Standard Offer request in due course if there's any convincing sign of improving maturity. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:21, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Absolutely; the immaturity of them issuing a 'scary logo warning' or whatever will definitely age out as they realize that throwing a Viacom logo someone's way won't stop them from vandalizing. They had good contributions, but their warnings really didn't work for here, and in six months, hopefully they'll have cleared things up. Nate • (chatter) 17:37, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

A note

Through some lazy scrolling, I came to Fleet's t/p where you stated:--No, admins can't see other people's thanks.But, actually the Thanks log allows anybody to check such details sans the particular edit for which one was thanked. As an example, Fleetcommand's thanks log could be viewed at here.This, in no-way, relates to the merit of the situation around the block and or the TBan violation.Regards:)Winged Blades of Godric^{On leave} 09:10, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Oh wow, I had no idea, thanks. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:48, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

...or [2]  ;) — fortunavelut luna 10:01, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Guess who?

Before you start blocking this account, you got to look at this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Derpily64. That's right Derpily64 apologized for cyber bullying me. 184.56.47.51 02:26, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

What someone else did is not relevant. You are blocked for your own actions, and your own actions alone, for continuing to do something dangerous after having been told to stop. IP blocked for block evasion. You *must* stay way for the minimum six-month period of the WP:Standard Offer and then make a request at WP:UTRS. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:13, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Strange

Zar je važno da l' se peva ili pjeva? World Tour was already Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Zar je važno da l' se peva ili pjeva? World Tour deleted per AfD, and I'm confused over your notice on the creator's TP. Wonder what might have happened? It was deleted today, the same date as your notice of a Speedy. ^{Atsme📞📧} 18:38, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Atsme: The Twinkle notice was left at 17:52 after the article was re-created by the author at 17:50 after it was deleted earlier at 17:05. Boing! presumably simply went ahead and deleted the re-created article. Alex Shih (talk) 18:50, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Alex - they weren't kidding when they named it "speedy". ^{Atsme📞📧} 18:52, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Yep, that's what happened - so the second delete was a WP:G4. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:56, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving

	Happy Thanksgiving
	A little early, but still... Wishing you a day of celebration, relaxation, and happiness. If you don't celebrate, pass this on to someone who does! -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 01:09, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Coatbridge

The article on Joseph Parker was added 2 minutes after the alteration... more haste less speed... be patient, two minutes is NOT a long delay--Stephencdickson (talk) 18:30, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

The convention is that articles must be written before individuals are added to "notable people" lists - we get so many unsuitable additions that it's really not practical to wait and see if every one that's added subsequently has an article written. And all you needed to do was revert my removal once it was written - I've now done that for you. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:50, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Barge articles

Greetings, I have been advised by Atlantic360 that you are delete admin, for two articles describing hotel barges that he had recommended for speedy deletion. I would be very grateful if you would kindly reconsider this block and allow me to recover these contents. I have no link to any operator, but I recognise that the link to the owner's website is best deleted. I undertake to do that. On the other hand I suggest leaving the link to french-waterways.com, because information is effectively expanded on this site, where no other non-commercial source describing the barge is available. Thank you for reconsidering. Inland waterways have been my field for 50 years, and the series of articles describing hotel barges (the first started in 1964, and all of them are notable) are only one aspect of my vocation on Wikipedia, which I hope to continue in the interests of all. The canal historian Charles Hadfield, who compiled the Encyclopedia Britannica entry on inland waterways, was my mentor back in the late 1960s. Thank you David-waterways (talk) 20:25, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

@David-waterways: I've provided user space copies of the two at User:David-waterways/Finesse (barge) and User:David-waterways/Grand Cru (barge), but I must suggest some caution. One of them had been deleted twice as being promotional, and I've checked the links used for the two and they're essentially advertising links or tourism directories. For the articles to be retained, they would need to show that the barges satisfy Wikipedia's minimum notability requirements (see WP:N) and the articles must be supported by multiple independent reliable sources (see WP:RS). I suggest that, when you believe you have these articles ready, you submit them using the Articles for Creation process at WP:AFC, which will allow experienced editors to review them before they're admitted to main space. Also, if you have any connection with these barges, with their owners, or with the hotel barge business (or anything related), you would need to adhere to Wikipedia's Conflict of Interest policy at WP:COI. But before you do anything else, I strongly suggest you concentrate on checking the notability requirements first - if the notability is not there, the articles will not be retained. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:45, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Question on Notability (NerdCubed)

I notice that you were the one to delete the NerdCubed page last. I've come to you since you seem fairly knowledgeable on these topics.

Recently, NerdCubed (Daniel Hardcastle) has received some media attention in several news articles for his unique upload schedules. He has almost 3 million subscribers on YouTube and this is just the most recent in a long line of articles about him. He has also appeared in Ashens' book, and was responsible for giving Emma Blackery much of her exposure. He even has an active subreddit dedicated to his works.

When will he be notable enough to warrant a WP:BLP article? Is he now? If so, what can I do to get the ball moving on this? Thanks, --TheDaJakester^{User talk:TheDaJakester} 22:23, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

@TheDaJakester: Sorry for the delay in answering. I've just examined it, and the version of the article I deleted back in March showed no indication of in-depth coverage and made no real claims of importance, and so it was deleted per WP:A7. As for whether he's sufficiently notable now, without doing my own investigation into sources (which I don't have the time or the inclination to do, sorry), I can't really offer much more help than pointing you to the General notability guideline at WP:GNG. One thing you might consider doing is creating a draft in your own user space, just covering the essentials that you think would be sufficient for notability and providing sources (which would need to be independent and cover him in depth as per WP:RS), and then submit it to WP:AFC for review. But I wouldn't put too much work into it at this stage in case it's not accepted. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:18, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

@Boing! said Zebedee: Thanks, that helps a lot! I was never sure on how to go about that type of process, and now I have a much better idea. Have a great day, man! =) TheDaJakester^Talk 22:20, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

unblock

kindly unblock my article "RETZOL (RETZAWL)" as I shall not violate the rules again. With Thanks Lallienzuol Hmar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.211.73.144 (talk) 07:43, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Your account at User:Zuollienlal hmar is not blocked, and the only article I can find with a similar title is Retzol (Retzawl), Assam which is free to edit (and, in fact, you were editing it before you made this request). So I really don't understand what you are asking me for. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:48, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Our mutual friend

I'm having a hard time explaining this right here... especially given that they only ever crossed paths once two years apart. GMG^talk 21:25, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Hmm, it's interesting that User:MechMaster Katzenstein turned up to revert that, and he's blocked for "not listening" disruption too. Both he and BebopAndRocksteady appear to have used IPs too, which geolocate to the northeastern USA. I suspect there's a small number of (probably young) contributors engaging disruptively with each other here. Anyway, I really can see BebopAndRocksteady's next block being indefinite, as I think what we're looking at here is simply a lack of maturity. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:36, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Request to vanish

Can you please help me vanish my account — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muhammad25199907 (talk • contribs) 13:51, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Sure, I'll do that shortly. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Done. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:43, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Can you please help me varnish my account? I feel it's lacking authenticity. Arthurnegus123 (talk) 22:38, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Hehe. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:45, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

December 2017

Nagarukhra, India

I note you have removed the speedy notice from the Nagarukhra, India article (which I did not add, but totally agree with).
I don't know if you read Talk:Nagarukhra, India but the current page creator, and at least three sockpuppets, have repeatedly been trying to rename Ukrah to Nagarukhra, which clearly infers it is the same place, not somewhere nearby. There have been extensive discussions at Talk:Nagarukhra, West Bengal, Talk:Ukrah and the Teahouse about this, but at no point did the current page creator or the three socks, suggest it was a different place, just that the town had been renamed - although they could not provide any evidence of this renaming. User:Yamaguchi先生 may have something to add, having been involved in the earlier discussions. Could I please ask you to reconsider this? Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 10:49, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

I've just commented at Talk:Nagarukhra, India, and I'm fixing it up. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:50, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Main discussion is at Talk:Nagarukhra. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:46, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Operation Paddle

When I made it a link to Operation Paddle on the Clearing the Channel Coast article, it was blue instead of red. When I clicked it I found myself back at Clearing... with a redirect notice at the top of the page. I thought this was circular and asked for advice on how to remove the redirect, because I want Operation Paddle to appear as a red link on the Clearing... page. I appear to have failed to communicate this and put you to some trouble, for which I apologise. Do you have any objection to making Operation Paddle a red link so that the need for an article is clear to editors? I intend to add detail to the Clearing... article and the articles branching off, Paddle being one of them. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 13:56, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Ah, I see now what you were trying to achieve. If you want it to show as a red link in the Clearing the Channel Coast article, we can't do that by deleting the Operation Paddle redirect because that's also used from other articles - and the links in this list of articles need to be redirected to Clearing the Channel Coast. It's true that having red links can be good to encourage someone to write the article - but is that really needed if you intend to write it yourself anyway? Anyway, one possibility for creating a redlink and avoiding circularity would be to pipe the link to a temporary different name and include a comment to explain things - have a look at the way I've done it at Clearing the Channel Coast and see what you think. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:34, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

That's just what I was hoping for, thanks. I intend to write the article but I need to clear the decks first. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 14:54, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

@Keith-264: I'm not sure about this. If you'd like to go ahead and write the Operation Paddle article, by all means do. But I don't think we should be deleting redirects just to turn links red. The link that was there was somewhat misplaced, being purportedly a 'main article' link even though no such main article existed. I guess there isn't really a proper way of dealing with this scenario on WP, short of removing the link from the page that the link redirects straight back to. — Smjg (talk) 15:53, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

It's OK Smjg, the redirect hasn't been deleted - I've made a redlink another way (admittedly being a bit WP:BOLD). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Fair enough, if it's a matter of timing, put it back. When I write Paddle, do I paste it into the redirect page? Keith-264 (talk) 16:43, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes Keith-264, exactly that - turn the current redirect at Operation Paddle into an article. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:56, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Right, thanks very much. Regards Keith-264 (talk) 18:09, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Mister wiki case has been accepted

You were recently listed as a party to or recently offered a statement in a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Evidence. Please add your evidence by December 15, 2017, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct of Mister Wiki editors/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kostas20142 (talk) 21:34, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your help!

I feel like today, I have helped Wikipedia with my AWB contributions and I have corrected a lot of spelling mistakes. I would like to take this opportunity to say thank you for your helpful advice you gave at User talk:Iridescent. I really started to think of my edits before saving them and skipped ones which won't make much of a difference. Thank you very much for your help! Pkbwcgs (talk) 12:00, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

OK, just stick to making changes that you are 100% certain of - and if there is any doubt at all, don't make the change. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:01, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Sometimes, for me, it takes time to learn from mistakes and all humans can't be perfect but I aim to avoid edits which make common mistakes and which don't make a difference to Wikipedia in a positive way. Pkbwcgs (talk) 12:07, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Boing! said Zebedee. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI Experiences survey

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Penis on wheels salt

FYI that I upped your protection to extended confirmed here, since the last user to create it was autoconfirmed. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:33, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Ah, OK, thanks. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:34, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

...Yeah... sure... that header isn't going to raise a few eyebrows at all. GMG^talk 15:34, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

It does sound a bit like a rare and exotic condiment. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:36, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Just wait until you try Testicles on a rope pepper... Martinevans123 (talk) 15:43, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Anyone fancy a visit to Kanamara Matsuri? Alex Shih (talk) 15:46, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

"Does that cum with fries?" Martinevans123 (talk) 15:49, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Things you learn on Wikipedia. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:50, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Boris Johnson cycling down Oxford Street again...?

Why you delete the 'Amundson Award' page?

Dear Sir,

I'm surprised about removing the page.

Although it does not contain any copyright infringement as it already exists in Wikipedia on the following link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_reaction_engineering#Neal_R._Amundson_Award_for_Excellence_in_Chemical_Reaction_Engineering

Please take the necessary.

Thank you,

YBUE (talk) 17:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

The content appeared to be a copied from http://iscre.org/ISCRE24/amundson.shtml, which is clearly marked as copyright (and even without a copyright statement, Wikipedia assumes content is copyright unless it is explicitly released under a suitable license). That other article appears to contain the same copyright violation, and I will investigate when I have some spare time. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:19, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Suga (rapper) Page Deletion

You recently deleted this page stating nothing had changed. Please refer to talk pages before deleting pages on wikipeda.Ukiss2ne14lyfe (talk) 18:34, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

I did, and I also compared the two versions of the article and did not consider there to be any significant improvement in notability. But as I have more important things to do right now than get involved in disagreements about K-pop, I'm happy to leave it to other people to discuss. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:42, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Sanity check

Can anybody edit-war with any non-creator-user to restore a subjective CSD tag? Asking for your opinion, since the last-but-one thread at 3RRN has left me pretty confused! Whilst my experiences at NPP led to my postings, after 678's post, I can't but wonder over whether if my interpretation is wrong.Regards:)And that was a mis-thanks:)Winged Blades ^Godric 18:38, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Without looking at anything specific, my understanding is that any editor (usually interpreted to mean in good standing) other than the article creator can decline a CSD nomination and remove the tag, and it must then not be reinstated - doing so can then constitute edit warring. (I'm a bit busy now, but I'll try to have a look at that example later). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:45, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks.I seem to be not wrong but anyways would prefer your evaluation of the report, once you get some time.Regards:)Winged Blades ^Godric 18:56, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2017).

Administrator changes

Joe Roe

JzG

Ericorbit • Perceval • Thingg • Tristanb • Violetriga

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.

Technical news

• Wikimedians are now invited to vote on the proposals in the 2017 Community Wishlist Survey on Meta Wiki until 10 December 2017. In particular, there is a section of the survey regarding new tools for administrators and for anti-harassment.
• A new function is available to edit filter managers which can be used to store matches from regular expressions.

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is open until Sunday 23:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC). There are 12 candidates running for 8 vacant seats.

Miscellaneous

• Over the last few months, several users have reported backlogs that require administrator attention at WP:ANI, with the most common backlogs showing up on WP:SPI, WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
• The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative is conducting a survey for English Wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:57, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Prasad Lad

I think you deleted A7 ? Probably you did not notice the person is MLA. DGG ( talk ) 23:53, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

I did not indeed! I think I was distracted by the "leader of the BJP" claim (which I guess I misinterpreted as I've just realised that it says "a leader"). I've restored it. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:06, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Boing! said Zebedee. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Doug Weller talk 17:31, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Time for a swifty

Just to say, at least one of your recent edits did not meet with dissatisfaction. Cheers, >SerialNumber54129...speculates 17:59, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Hehe, nicely put, thanks :-) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:58, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Revdel

Is necessary here, I think? Would you like to do the honors? I'm involved on the page. Cheers, Vanamonde (talk) 15:01, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Yep, definitely, done. As an aside, I think you'd have been fine to do it yourself on BLP/IAR/"Any reasonable admin" grounds. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:06, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: As a further aside, I'm a big fan of the music of Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, so the name was immediately familiar. The now-deleted user page said "Kaushal Fateh Ali Khan is an Indian Composer These are Sufi singer too" in Hindi, and had been editing the articles Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan and Rahat Fateh Ali Khan. Now, Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan was Pakistani as is his nephew Rahat Fateh Ali Khan, so an Indian ...Fateh Ali Khan seems perhaps a little suspicious. I'll keep an eye on their future edits. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:28, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

That makes two of us :) Thanks: Yes indeed, the name is suspicious. I have had a feeling for a while that there is a tendency among the pro-Hindutva folks who wish to shift an article's POV, to use Islamic- and Christian-sounding names; as though by doing so, they can avoid scrutiny. A tendency similar, I think, to folks who register with POV intent using names like "neutrality111". Cheers. PS: I agree that I could probably do it myself: I just have no wish to give more ammunition to the usual "biased admin" folks than absolutely necessary. Vanamonde (talk) 15:39, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it's definitely all a little suspicious - I'll keep my eyes peeled. And yes, probably better to minimize the chances of "biased admin" accusations - you know where I am if I can help. (Listening to some Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan now - his vocal range from delicacy to intensity was astonishing, and I recall how sad I was the day I learned of his death.) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:06, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93: Looking further, including at their deleted contributions, I've indef blocked until they can come up with a meaningful explanation. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:13, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks: I've been too busy to investigate further. Vanamonde (talk) 18:22, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

No fancy template,

Boing, but just to wish you happy holidays and all the best for 2018. It's probably a lot warmer where I am than where you are - wish you were here again, could do with another beer 😎 Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:40, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Hopefully it won't be too long into the New Year before I'm heading East again - and next time, we must find somewhere that has big bottles! Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:56, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

And olive branch & holiday wishes!

Boing! said Zebedee, please accept these holiday wishes :) I've caused this year to end on a chord of disappointment for many, but I hope that despite my mistakes and the differences in opinion and perspectives, and regardless of what the outcome is or in what capacity I can still contribute in the coming year, we can continue working together directly or indirectly on this encyclopedic project, whose ideals are surely carried by both of our hearts. I'm hoping I have not fallen in your esteem to the level where "no hard feelings" can no longer ring true, because I highly respect you and your dedication to Wikipedia, and I sincerely wish you and your loved ones all the best for 2018. Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 03:59, 21 December 2017 (UTC), humbled but optimistic about the upcoming year of renewal and growth!

Hey, I still like and respect you a lot - as I said, I'd very likely have supported you had you gone for a new RfA (and still might well do if that's what it comes down to). New year soon, clean slate, hope you have a good one. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:59, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

It's been a short while back, but I have learned tremendously from you, and will continue to do with pleasure. Happy holidays, Boing! Sending greetings from Kyoto, Japan. Alex Shih (talk) 08:22, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

That's a very kind thing to say, and I wish you a great time too. I'd love to see Kyoto some day. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:00, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Boing! said Zebedee: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 16:17, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Thank you, and same to you. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:40, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas Boing! said Zebedee!!


Hi Boing! said Zebedee, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
Thanks for all your help and contributions on the 'pedia! ,
   –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 13:22, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, and bags of humbugs to you too! Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:59, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Happy Holidays

From Stave one of Dickens A Christmas Carol Old Marley was as dead as a door-nail. Mind! I don’t mean to say that I know, of my own knowledge, what there is particularly dead about a door-nail. I might have been inclined, myself, to regard a coffin-nail as the deadest piece of ironmongery in the trade. But the wisdom of our ancestors is in the simile; and my unhallowed hands shall not disturb it, or the Country’s done for. You will therefore permit me to repeat, emphatically, that Marley was as dead as a door-nail. So you see even Charles was looking for a reliable source :-) Thank you for your contributions to the 'pedia. ~ MarnetteD|Talk 00:27, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Hehe, thanks - and same to you too. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:35, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings

...to you and yours, from the Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 02:35, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Well, it's the Great White West from where I am :-) You have a great time too. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:38, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

New Age Hypocrisy

Hi Alan, Would you consider undoing your recent deletion of User:Timneu22's user page, to preserve the historical record? That user created a considerable amount of bad blood as a self-declared new pages patroller back in the day, and his user page is linked to here, for instance. Not only did Timneu22 drive away a number of good-faith new contributors by deleting articles within minutes of their creation, he also maintained a vanity biography about his efforts as a "New Age pianist" with the help of a sock, all while insulting more deserving musicians he just hadn't heard of and couldn't be bothered to look up while playing "whack-a-mole" with new pages. The worst, by far, was when he gloated over deleting an article written by a ten-year-old boy who then went on and made a heartbreaking video about his experience with Timneu22. Rather than face the music of contributors asking him to be more considerate, Timneu22 disappeared under a profanity-laden cloud, only to come back in 2016 with another sock and restore his vanity bio. I'd recommend salting his article, as he doesn't appear to give up easily, and it seems unlikely that he, as a piano player, will ever progress past mentions in the kind of fly-by-night sources he not only seems to have paid for coverage, but may well be the webmaster of in one case. I was not involved in the proceedings against Timneu22 in 2011, but I watched with great interest, and I did pass a link to the video made by that sweet kid with the Elevator filming (hobby) article deleted by Timneu22 to one of the parties in the Rfcu. I think someone as personable as Timneu22 should be given the opportunity to come back here and find his puerile user page intact, if only to remind himself that bad deeds will sometimes come back to haunt you unless you're prepared to work harder at making this world a nicer place. Season's greetings (Please feel free to block me as a dealer in karma of the unpleasant kind. It's not something I enjoy, and I'm mostly retired anyway.) Another One Rides The Bus (talk) 03:34, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi. User pages (but not talk pages) can be deleted on request according to WP:U1, and I don't really have the power to override that and reinstate the page. I see he has also contacted one of our newly-elected Arbs at User talk:BU Rob13#Delete, not blank and has been directed to the Courtesy Vanishing procedure, so it's out of my hands now. I've put the bio on my watchlist. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:37, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Lol. Only the finest admins and arbs for our Tim! I bet next up will be Wikiquote, where he indulged in that timeless trifecta of self-promotion, copyright violations and bickering. That Jeffq he tussled with has the patience of a saint (and great taste in far out T-shirts). Anyhow, thank you for explaining the procedure and for keeping an eye on the biography. Another One Rides The Bus (talk) 15:39, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I can see why Jeffq wears shades! Oh, I listened to a few of Tim's compositions - and I certainly agree that future notability seems unlikely. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:07, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Wishes

No pictures and all; just wishing you and your loved ones a Merry Christmas and a pleasant 2018:)Winged Blades^Godric 12:50, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Very kind, thank you, and the same to you. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:08, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Ad Orientem (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Haven't watched Mary Poppins in years :-) Have a good one too. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:10, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

For closing the subsection, I was going to withdraw it when I wake up (just now). This issue is obviously very divisive, so I thought somebody (me) had to make a fool of himself to find where the line is. Best, Alex Shih (talk) 03:13, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I think it was worth a try in order to see if there was any compromise possible. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:50, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

FYI

I agree with NeilN's statement here. The user is on their last straw with me. Hope you had a good holiday, and it's good to talk to you once again. Cheers :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:53, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

@Oshwah and NeilN: Either of you is free to issue a new block if necessary - you don't need me ;-) (And same to you Oshwah, thanks). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:06, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

@Oshwah: As I reverted some of the user's edits, it's probably not the best idea for me to block. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 12:26, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

NeilN - I'm comfortable with doing it if things continue. Ping me if they do and I'll take a look. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:28, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Nevermind, it has since I last saw the user's contribs. I've blocked per WP:NOTHERE; looking at this user's contributions and edits, it's become clear that this is the case to me. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 12:30, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Boing! said Zebedee!

Happy New Year!

Boing! said Zebedee,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
-- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 23:35, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thanks, and the same to you and yours. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:01, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Nfitz

Hi, you appeared to have revoked talk page access for Nfitz at the end of October but somehow they've continued to edit there. I've just removed some hidden stuff that they added and which isn't even relevant to an unblock request but beyond that I am even more confused than normal. Am I misunderstanding something?

HNY and best wishes, BTW. - Sitush (talk) 18:54, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

See [3] - you turned off TPA but it doesn't seem to be working. Doug Weller talk 19:10, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Hmm, it seems I actually restored TPA (and the block log comment is just the previous one, so not a new comment from me). I have no recollection of what that was about, and with a bit of new year cheer inside me I'm not going to make any changes right now - so please, feel free to do whatever you feel is best. And HNY to you both (and to anyone else who's watching). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:30, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Nothing much I can do, Boing. I've worked it out, though: you restored access "temporarily" to allow participation in an ANI thread - see the section containing this diff. I've no idea why they've been inserting commented-out notes about various articles since then. Off to bed now that the fireworks have stopped and the dog has calmed down. I believe 1400 cars have gone up in flames this evening in the 'Pool. - Sitush (talk) 00:40, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Ah, right - I'll have a closer look after I've have a night's sleep. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:44, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

---

Archive 25

←

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

→

Archive 35