User talk:JzG/Archive 187
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:JzG. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 180 | ← | Archive 185 | Archive 186 | Archive 187 | Archive 188 | Archive 189 | Archive 190 |
Hello
I have an issue with an article, I had put up This article for Afd but then it got recreated before the discussion even ended, but still did not meet the notability guidelines to my opinion. Should I put up a new Afd request? Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 10:38, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- Synoman Barris, that is one persistent spammer. Thanks. Guy (help!) 10:44, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- JzG, Just saw you deleted all the spam articles. Thanks Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 10:50, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
ANI notification
Just a heads up that I referenced your interactions with ToddGrande. APK whisper in my ear 07:58, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
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.
MCS page
Hi JzG. Can you explain what is profound about the changes I made on this page? They are from the most recent academic reviews about MCS and the two most recent national government inquiries into the condition. The definitions I used are from the most recent large scale reviews of the condition in peer reviewed journal. What is your concern here? Thank you, DocBenT — Preceding unsigned comment added by DocBenT (talk • contribs) 23:10, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- DocBenT, you obscured the fact that it doesn't exist, and you've been reverted by three experienced editors now, so it's not just me. Take it to the talk page. Guy (help!) 07:56, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Another one
Hello please take a look here. This article had undergone CSD but the author brought it up again without improvements. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 09:47, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
- Synoman Barris, that one does not look like self-promotion, but probably is PR. The history is a mess, as is the creator's contributions list. I think I will move it back to Draft. Guy (help!) 10:14, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
- JzG, It was never SP, but it had recently been moved to draft because of the same reasons . Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 10:16, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
- Synoman Barris, ugh Guy (help!) 10:16, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
- JzG, Yeah, it is sometimes annoying, especially when it is persistent. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 10:20, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
- Synoman Barris, ugh Guy (help!) 10:16, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
- JzG, It was never SP, but it had recently been moved to draft because of the same reasons . Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 10:16, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Weboflight
You blocked User:Weboflight for being a suspected Scientology WP:SPA, but it was reversed. (context here). I've been following along for a while and I think your gut feeling was right. The edit history is a completely random set of grammar fixes, no actual contributions that I can clearly see (putting aside the 2017 edits), yet still always returning to the north star of Scientology related topics, and very often with the effect of toning down, or making it more palatable, or making criticism seem weaker. e.g. these three reverts that I made just now, as well as some from months past. Each edit, taken on its own, is pretty much unobjectionable, but it's a death by a thousand cuts type of scenario, I fear. Anyway just wanted to bring it to your attention. I'll continue to follow along and check in on their contributions periodically. Leijurv (talk) 05:37, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
McKenzie method
McKenzie method (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
23 May: Spcarp83 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) partially blocked from McKenzie method.
5 June: NDenPT (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) suddenly appears, starts editing the page, and soon starts a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard#McKenzie method. "I am a physiotherapist and use the Mackenzie method as one of the tools in my work. When I came across this page, I was very surprised at its contents, as I know how this method works and have an idea of its effectiveness."[1]
Brakkar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who has been around since January, pushes the same POV.[2] May be a meatpuppet or an unrelated McKenzie method practitioner or happy patient. When he first started editing NATO phonetic alphabet and showed a suspicious amount of knowledge about Wikipedia editing. I asked him about this[3] he blanked the page without answering.[4] He is currently blocked for edit warring on McKenzie method
Related:
- Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard#McKenzie method
- Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard/Archive 71#McKenzie method
--Guy Macon (talk) 18:12, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
- (
Buttinsky) Guy, don't forget MarqReg (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) too. There is something odd about all this. I've been getting a WP:BKFIP vibe lately. Alexbrn (talk) 18:15, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
- OK, that's weird. I had the exact same thought when Brakkar decided to "fix" NATO phonetic alphabet. Just an impression, no evidence, so I didn't say anything. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:46, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, looking at a recent iteration[5] I'm noticing: snarky but quite well-written edit summaries, aggressive edit warring, a concern about MOS:ANDOR, and User Talk page blanking. Alexbrn (talk) 19:01, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
- I'm unfamiliar with the long term thing, I just thought this lot were all socks. (as we speak, talk:bates method just jumped up to the top of my watchlist again. haha.) -Roxy the elfin dog . wooF 19:26, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
- I think there's one BKFIP candidate, otherwise yes it's possibly just common-or-garden puppetry of some kind at the root of of the recent disruption. Alexbrn (talk) 20:22, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
- I'm unfamiliar with the long term thing, I just thought this lot were all socks. (as we speak, talk:bates method just jumped up to the top of my watchlist again. haha.) -Roxy the elfin dog . wooF 19:26, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, looking at a recent iteration[5] I'm noticing: snarky but quite well-written edit summaries, aggressive edit warring, a concern about MOS:ANDOR, and User Talk page blanking. Alexbrn (talk) 19:01, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
- OK, that's weird. I had the exact same thought when Brakkar decided to "fix" NATO phonetic alphabet. Just an impression, no evidence, so I didn't say anything. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:46, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Administrators' newsletter – July 2020
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2020).
|
|
|
Guideline and policy news
- A request for comment is in progress to remove the T2 (template that misrepresents established policy) speedy deletion criterion.
Technical news
- Protection templates on mainspace pages are now automatically added by User:MusikBot II (BRFA).
Arbitration
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an
RfC regarding on-wiki harassment
. The RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC and is open to comments from the community. - The Medicine case was closed, with a remedy authorizing standard discretionary sanctions for
all discussions about pharmaceutical drug prices and pricing and for edits adding, changing, or removing pharmaceutical drug prices or pricing from articles
.
- Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold an
Battersbys of Stockport
Hi, I'm Phil btw
Looked up my Old Stops list and it was a John in my form not a Dave. There were 3 Battersbys there while I was, 2 from Marple Bridge and one from Romiley - all Js. Sirjohnperrot (talk) 08:00, 5 July 2020 (UTC)