User talk:Ritchie333/Archive 94

Archive 90

←

Archive 92

Archive 93

Archive 94

Archive 95

Archive 96

→

Archive 100

ANI Help requested

Could you please give some assistance to this thread on ANI? It's going around and around and going nowhere. Full disclosure, I got your name from the ANI history as you were the last admin to edit. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 14:42 on April 8, 2019 (UTC)

Real ale

You say that you are a real ale drinker which suggests that you are based in Britain. I am a card-carrying member of CAMRA based in Croydon. We should meet up and I will buy you a few halves so you can confirm your view that I am unfit to be an admin. Suggest a venue — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:01, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Now that's some dispute resolution...question does NewCastle Brown Ale count as a real ale? It's one of my favorites and one I'm having tonight! Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:12, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Newky Brown? No, it comes in a bottle, and although it's technically an ale, you won't see it offered at a CAMRA style pub, which serves beers direct from kegs with strange names like these.

Anyway, I think "unfit to be an admin" is a little strong; it's like when one of my kids has thumped the other one, called them names or been generally obnoxious - I'd give them a right telling off, but I wouldn't say they were "unfit to be my son". I'm busy for the next couple of weekends, but sure I'm up for a pint, and Croydon is easy to get to via Thameslink. I miss Beanos. I have previously said you're a nice guy and on the few times I've met you, we've had a pleasant chat about London pubs and architecture. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:23, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

You and I clearly have different senses of humour. "Unfit to be an admin" was sarcasm and did not require any comment.

Real ale: please look at Wikipedia: it is irrelevant whether the container is a cask or a bottle. Newky Brown is pasteurised. I add another requirement: real ale must come from a small independent brewery, preferably one that I can find on Google StreetView.

Yoshi. As part of my training in adminship, please reply to this message on my behalf. I genuinely want to see your response. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:47, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

@Hell in a Bucket: That's the technical reason - the real reason is that all CAMRA members (broadly construed) are middle aged beardy weirdos who wouldn't dream of drinking something down-marketed towards students and council estate pubs. (That's my sense of humour, another amusing conversation I'm having elsewhere on the net at the moment includes "I wouldn't kick Donald Trump in the bollocks, I might mess up my shoes". Humour works best when it punches upwards).

@RHaworth: Now, regarding this "unfit to be an admin" - what on earth are you getting at? I can imagine an opening real-life conversation with you, I'd probably start with something like "have you ever worked in retail, customer service or technical support?" (and if you answered "yes", I would query how long for). Then I'd probably say something like "imagine the woman serving at the bar is fed up and just wants to get home; I mean she's probably been here since 8am to unlock and get the delivery of kegs in and probably isn't the mood for small talk or banter. However, she's professional enough not to call a spade a spade as it would probably be a sackable offence".

On your personal website, you state, "I also get my kicks from helping to delete the endless dross that flows into Wikipedia along with the good stuff." (emphasis mine) That implies you derive some sort of pleasure from deleting other people's work. It might also explain Iridescent's claim that you run through CAT:CSD and delete stuff indiscriminately, despite the page clearly saying at the top, "Before speedily deleting a page, take the time to ensure that it meets the criteria for speedy deletion, check the links, the history, and (for images) the file links. If there is any doubt at all, switch the article to a process like Wikipedia:Proposed deletion that allows time for others to review the proposal." Now, even though I've deleted thousands of articles, mainly through CSD, I don't get any pleasure from doing any of it. Usually, it's with regret, occasionally with G3s and G10s, I'm irritated, but I don't ever get pleasure unless it's declining the CSD and improving it so it gets posted on the main page. If you look at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Megalibrarygirl, you can get a general sense that the community (or at least the portion that cares enough to comment) endorses my take on this - and consequently why you've now been dragged off to ANI with a bunch of longstanding admins thinking taking you to Arbcom for a desysop might not be so bad an idea, and are scratching your head wondering what the hell is going on.

The thing to be aware of is that these people contributing "endless dross" are not all drones and wiseguys sitting in an Indian sockfarm. Some of them are real people, like my mother, who never learned how to program computers or do anything seriously technical, in her case because it was a more enjoyable, lucrative and rewarding career educating primary school children. (And FWIW I have had a go at giving primary school children piano lessons, and it was painful and I felt mentally exhausted after just half an hour - the respect I have for the teaching profession shot up as a result of that). They've just heard about Wikipedia being "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit" and want to try and contribute somehow in their own small way. Dismissing them as idiots is just plain rude. That you don't seem to understand this is a demonstration of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Or as David Ogilvy put it, "The customer is not a moron" - treat people like idiots and they'll respond in kind. The classic example is where you continually ask people "why can't you add a link, if you don't do that I'm not going to answer". How many non-technical people who just want to do some factual writing know you surround the term with two square braces? How many people know it's useful? How many people actually expect to get a rude reply from you if they don't do it? I suspect around zero; they're not doing it to annoy you. Assume good faith.

I fear it's probably too late for you to have a sea change and recognise that what you are doing is damaging to the project and seriously wrong, and we'll be back here in 2020 having the same conversation. :-( Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:51, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Wow. What a thoughtful post. EEng 01:48, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

I'd add that my allegation—that RHaworth just opens up CAT:EX and CAT:CSD and indiscriminately deletes their contents—would be trivially easy to refute were I wrong. Even if we very generously assume that only one in 50 taggings are wrong (the real number is much higher than that, and for some of the more widely misunderstood deletion categories like WP:A7 is probably nearer 50%), then for someone deleting at this kind of volume it should be simple to point me towards numerous diffs of "deletion declined, this has a credible claim of significance" or "I'm not sure this is uncontroversial so I'll take it to AfD".

At the ANI thread I counselled against taking this to Arbcom. However, despite his claim that he's unable to respond at the ANI thread because "I am away from home at the moment without my usual display facilities" he's continuing to perform mass deletions (while he's not yet back to his 100-deletion-per-minute rate, he made 14 deletions in one minute just a couple of hours ago). He's also still batch-deleting without actually checking the articles he's deleting, unless he's going to try to justify deleting a page that has existed since 2009 and is unquestionably accurate (albeit of questionable appropriateness) as a "blatant hoax". I now consider his non-response to concerns a blatant case of ANI flu in an attempt to evade scrutiny (the alternative—that he doesn't have the technical ability to read the pages at present but is still running deletion scripts anyway—is even worse), and if you do open a case I'll fully support it. ‑ Iridescent 14:14, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

(adding) I've just noticed User talk:RHaworth/Editnotice, which RHaworth was editing only today so presumably still stands by. As far as I'm concerned, the utterly obnoxious attitude expressed there is straightforward evidence of a mentality that's incompatible with Wikipedia adminship, and probably with Wikipedia per se. ‑ Iridescent 14:27, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm lost for words. I've sent that to MfD. I realise that will create a drama fest, but it's no different to what we did for MjolnirPants, and he gets a bit more of a free pass since he isn't an admin. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:51, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

I've been watching this unfold from afar, with both trepidation and frustration. AFAICS the editnotice is a symptom, not a problem. Talking to IPs and explaining your deletions is required by policy; if he's not doing it, then deleting the editnotice isn't enough. If he is, then an MfD shouldn't be necessary. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:49, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

I understand that, but I think if we're going to have to do something unpleasant (which this is), then small steps like the MfD are worth having a try first. It will also take the general temperature of the community to see if there is any appetite for an arbcom case, or whether it'll be tossed out as a storm in a teacup or (even worse) get boomeranged on me. In fact that last thing has really been what's stopping me from trying to take action for some time, as it's fairly obvious I'm irritated by all this. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:56, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93, see this; he explicitly says that he'll refuse to speak to IP editors because by ignoring them it "helps to train you in a basic matter of Wikipedia etiquette". (He doesn't specify what the "basic matter of Wikipedia etiquette" is, and yes the irony of someone so consistently rude having the lack of self-awareness to criticize anyone else's lack of etiquette is not lost.) ‑ Iridescent 15:58, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Oh, I don't disagree that it's inappropriate; it's both rude (as you point out) and not in compliance with policy. I suppose I could be an optimist, and hope that the MfD will convince RHaworth that his attitude is out of step with community expectations; but somehow I can't quite get there. I'd try talking to him, but Ritchie tried that already, and it doesn't seem to have gone anywhere. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:02, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

• Real ale in a bottle is a cop-out IMHO, and nothing like the real thing. I personally don't regard Hobgoblin in a bottle as anything different from Newky Brown or American IPAs. I'll drink either at home, but the real thing comes out of a cask and for CAMRA to claim that the difference is down to pasteurisation is disingenuous. @RHaworth: have you ever considered coming to the London wiki Meetup? Lots of good ales there.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:10, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Indeed he does Amakuru  :) ——SerialNumber54129 16:14, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

I have seen SN54129 there, drinking in stereo :-) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:15, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Ha, guess I should pay more attention to who's who then!  — Amakuru (talk) 16:44, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

@Amakuru: Yep, there's always the price of a pint in the old sky rocket for the chap who brought Rwandan Civil War to FA  :) ——SerialNumber54129 17:53, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

@Serial Number 54129: why, thank you. We can have a pint of Christmas Ale (on Ritchie333's recommendation) and discuss the goings-on of John/Eleanor Rykener. That was my first FA for around six years though, so I really should try to work a little harder!  — Amakuru (talk) 18:37, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

On a related note, I am rather sad to have fallen out with The Rambling Man, particularly as the London termini mini-project is almost done, it was his idea to start it in the first place. I don't think I could have got the parent article through FLC without his help. I stand by everything I've said in the past; he has been a helpful GA reviewer, I am pleased to see Alf Ramsey at FA which I know him and Dweller have spent a great deal of work getting there, WP:ERRORS2 sees regular traffic and manages the situation of preserving the quality on the main page, and some of the blocks and sanctions against him have been, well, batshit insane. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:26, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that is indeed a shame. The Rambling Man is an excellent Wikipedian but his wrath, once earned, can be hard to shake off. TRM, do you like real ale and banter? Because if so you should come to the London meetup yourself... Perhaps you spend most of your weekends rambling though, like the good folk who are featured in OTD today.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:50, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Well...

...Technically, all administrators fail my criteria since all of those user access levels are technically revoked once they adorn the administrator hat. (I hope you find the humor in this.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:40, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Ah, those were the days. I used to be a rollbacker, a pending changes reviewer, and all sorts of other things back in the day, until those bits were cruelly stripped from me.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:47, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Have no fear Steel1943, I found the humour in the Oscar Wilde name-drop. As an RfA criteria, I would recommend TonyBallioni's "Not a jerk, has clue". Simple stats and contributions just aren't good enough to work that out. I generally start at the AfD stats and have a look at a debate where consensus didn't match the candidate's !vote. That's a great place to see if the candidate talks a sensible and respectful argument that ultimately didn't go their way. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:50, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

I was looking at TonyBallioni's criteria earlier, and that may be something I may add to my "Additional considerations" section for sure. After some self-reflection, turns out that I'm taking a serious approach to developing the criteria for my RfA stances that I can stand by and am even working to further develop it at this moment (as opposed to the rather admittedly sporadic, "flavor-of-the-season" votes I acknowledge I've done in the past and really having no clear direction.) Steel1943 (talk) 23:22, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

New message from Narutolovehinata5

Hello, Ritchie333. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Susan Montgomery Williams.
Message added 02:42, 26 April 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 02:42, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure what else I can bring to the discussion - I'm not warming to any of the proposed hooks and can't think of another. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:31, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hope Ryden, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages John Miller and Harriman State Park (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Say, EEng, have you got a DYK hook about "a world expert on beavers"? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:40, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Nothing worth mentioning right now. Let me think about it. EEng 13:22, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

... that Hope Ryden was a flight attendant on Pan American's first transatlantic jet flight, made and produced documentary films, wrote numerous books, and published studies of coyotes and beavers? (Sorry, couldn't find a way to work Trump in.) EEng 23:00, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Government's have been trying to eradicate them. The Beavers, that is, not the experts. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:38, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

• Here's another, a bit hookier:

  ... that before she became an expert on wild animals, Hope Ryden was a international flight attendant and used her long layovers to observe animals in Africa and Asia?

EEng 23:31, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Okay, nomination up in the usual place. The sources for the hooks need adding. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:50, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

@Megalibrarygirl: Can you add this DYK to the "list of new stuff in Women in Red" or wherever such things go? I'm afraid I'm still a bit of ignoramus when it comes to the project as I only write new women bios every now and again (as opposed to just badgering you to do them) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:55, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: I tagged the talkpage with a WIR template. That should allow the bot to snag the notification. :) Megalibrarygirl (talk) 17:25, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Restore Draft of deleted page: Lancaster Literacy Research Centre

Dear Richie - please could you restore the draft of this page to me so I can use the content and the references elsewhere than Wikipedia. Thank you! Swannpool (talk) 20:23, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

@Swannpool: Done - userfied to User:Swannpool/Literacy Research Centre, Lancaster University Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:39, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Tania (Indian actress)

Hello, sir you recently deleted an article Tania (Indian actress) on behalf of advertising. These were only changes in last edit before it I think article was eligible for Wikipedia. Please could you you restore the article by reverting the last edit(in which advertisements were added). SangrurUser (talk) 14:57, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

@SangrurUser: Really sorry about that, I wasn't paying attention. The criteria for unambigious advertising or promotion state that it is only applicable if every revision of the article qualifies, which is clearly not the case here. Your version as of this revision is a perfectly acceptable stub article. Unfortunately, another editor then made this edit which basically turned the article into something completely inappropriate, which is what got tagged for deletion. I have restored the article and reverted back to the stable revision. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:02, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Alfonso Martin Castillo‎ page

Hey! Thanks for fixing the link to the page which I originally couldn't find since it was a broken redirect. ImpWarfare (talk) 17:11, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

No problem. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:25, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

adminship

How do I apply? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigdaddy69gag (talk • contribs) 00:36, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Bigdaddy69gag - The administrator toolset is a senior-level user right that's not granted to new or novice users. Before one should ever consider applying for the role, you need to demonstrate a long-term and consistent history of knowledge, behavior, good judgment, and experience on Wikipedia. This message isn't meant to turn you away or discourage one from applying down the road someday, but you have a long way to go before you should decide to venture down that path... :-) ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:44, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

...and on top of that, the standard offer applies. ——SerialNumber54129 08:30, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

The first rule about requesting adminship is that you do not talk about requesting adminship. The second rule about requesting adminship is that you DO NOT talk about requesting adminship. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:22, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

All good advice. It's also helpful if you don't get blocked for having an "offensive" user name, three edits into your Wikipedia career. I always say that to new users learning the ropes.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:33, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Heh! :D ——SerialNumber54129 13:44, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Review of a deletion request for Shawn Stee

Hello sir! I apologize in advance because I’m a bit of a newbie working in the Wiki-world. I am writing/opening a discussion (I hope this is the correct forum) to request a re-consideration for an article that’s been deleted from Wiki for Shawn Steel. I understand that the resources that were initially associated with the page did not conform with Wiki, however I have new resources that I believe confirm the identity of Shawn Steel as a political figure. May I ask how I may go about providing those to you for a review to consider undeleting Shawn Steel’s page? If I am in the wrong forum to discuss this, again I apologize and seek your guidance. Thank you very much! Spicybrownie (talk) 02:24, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

@Spicybrownie: The article was put to a deletion debate Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shawn Steel and nobody argued to keep it. I have restored it to User:Spicybrownie/Shawn Steel so you can recover the text. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:41, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Princes Arcade

I am currently working on this page. Please only make minor edits until I have finished. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User888888888 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

I just wanted to grab the details from the Survey of London so there was a basic stub; incredibly I can't find anything in the London Encyclopedia, but I might simply be looking in the wrong place. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Ok great, thanks for your help! Piccadilly Arcade needs attention too. As a new registered editor it is depressing that my changes were so criticised when a number of related articles are so poor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by User888888888 (talk • contribs)

I'm busy for most of the weekend; if I get a chance I will look and see what my sources have to say about it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:42, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Strong and stable

On 4 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Strong and stable, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Theresa May described her leadership as "strong and stable" but her critics called it "weak and wobbly"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Strong and stable. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Strong and stable), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 special circular

Administrators must secure their accounts The Arbitration Committee may require a new RfA if your account is compromised. Use strong, unique passwords for your Wikipedia account and associated email Change your password now if your Wikipedia account password or email password is reused on another website, exposed, or weak Enable two-factor authentication now for improved security

View additional information

Why have I received this message? All administrators are receiving it. What prompted you to send this message? Recently, several Wikipedia admin accounts were compromised. The admin accounts were desysopped on an emergency basis. In the past, the Committee often resysopped admin accounts as a matter of course once the admin was back in control of their account. The committee has updated its guidelines. Admins may now be required to undergo a fresh Request for Adminship (RfA) after losing control of their account. What do I need to do? Only to follow the instructions in this message. Check that your password is unique (not reused across sites). Check that your password is strong (not simple or guessable). Enable Two-factor authentication (2FA), if you can, to create a second hurdle for attackers. How can I find out more about two-factor authentication (2FA)? You can find out more about 2FA at m:2FA.

This message was sent to all administrators following a recent motion. Thank you for your attention. For the Arbitration Committee, Cameron11598 02:33, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kensington (Olympia) station

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kensington (Olympia) station you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amakuru -- Amakuru (talk) 11:00, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

New message from Winged Blades of Godric

Hello, Ritchie333. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/West Pier Trust.
Message added 12:22, 4 May 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

∯WBG^converse 12:22, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you!

Truly appreciate your closing the move request on one of our project essays. Curious as to whether you did not close the other one because you were not aware of it, or if you chose not to as closure by the same admin would be inappropriate? SusunW (talk) 13:39, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

@SusunW: I haven't seen the other one, and I only noticed this one because of the ANI thread about Netaholic. If it's not too much bother, I might leave that for another admin to close, simply because nobody can then accuse me of "bias towards WiR". On a more personal note, I have long admired the general working ethic and camaraderie that goes on at Women in Red, even if biographies of women aren't my main area of expertise, and I am quite disappointed to see these sort of argumentative chaps turning up. I do not want a repeat of this. :-( Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:46, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation Ritchie. I totally understand and am glad that this is being discussed, though I note the lack of women participating. The innocence claimed of only "AfD'd two articles in two days" is looking to be an effective smokescreen for the rest of the disruptive behavior that resulted, which is the larger issue, IMO. SusunW (talk) 14:15, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

@SusunW: Although I've opposed a topic ban for deletion, I have been reminded of an earlier discussion (the only other time I have interacted with Netoholic) where I basically threw my hands up and said, "jeez, is this vitally important, I'm off to the pub for a pint of Curious IPA to get a clear head". Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:27, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

That about sums up the basic difference in the way this appears to you/me (not so bold as to say men/women): It's a big deal, but let's just go have a beer and consider it/discuss it vs. It's a big deal and I will not be interacting further as it feels hostile. (I also find this "editors who meet up face to face tend not to be aggressive to one another online" telling. Why on earth would one be aggressive to someone they do not know online or offline? That makes zero sense to me.) Just my 2 cents. SusunW (talk) 16:36, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

"It's a big deal, but let's just go have a beer and consider it/discuss it" In my case, it was more "I have no idea why you think this is so urgent I need to drop everything and deal with it now, so I'm logging off and doing something else for a bit before I get a sore head." Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:21, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm piling on with the thanks, Ritchie, for closing the move request and for your kind note regarding my rationale as to why the move should not occur. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:09, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

 — Amakuru (talk) 15:13, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

I think this whole farce will be an endearing subject of conversation at the next London meetup, but for now I'm just putting it to one side and getting on with innocuous things like a new project to improve our coverage of the Victoria line (just for you, Amakuru :-D). One thing I've noticed is that editors who meet up face to face tend not to be aggressive to one another online, and while I appreciate sitting in a pub with 19 geeks wearing anoraks (broadly construed) isn't everyone's cup of tea, it does bring with it some advantages. In particular, Whispyhistory has been championed as a content creator par excellence, not least by Philafrenzy and Edwardx, and the conversations the four of us have at Pendrel's Oak on a regular basis mean we're all interested in what each other is doing and tend to look out for each other's articles, working together as a team. I'm happy to talk a bit more about my personal life and situation in the pub, which I'm not prepared to do on-wiki, and that means they've got more of a rounded idea what I'm interested in and how I work. Has Jesswade88 ever been to one of the London meetups? I've got a feeling she's met Andrew Davidson but I can't be certain of that, and she does seem to work in relative isolation on-wiki. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:58, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

I think Edwardx and Whispyhistory already knew the correct way to treat people, Ritchie. From my experience they are the same in person as online and have not been civilised by contact with other editors, they were already civilised. Hopefully their good behaviour will rub off on the rest of us. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:36, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

You are too kind, Philafrenzy. I simply try to act in accordance with the golden rule. Almost all of the credit for mentoring Whispyhistory belongs to you. I may have provided a little moral support, but the hard graft has been yours. Nonetheless, it pleases me greatly that this effort has paid off so handsomely, rather more alas than I can say for much of my editathon activity. Edwardx (talk) 23:48, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

You don't know what seeds you have sown and as far as mentoring is concerned, was it not you who started me doing DYKs in the first place? Now Whispyhistory has their own apprentices. They grow up so fast. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:00, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Philafrenzy. Nature shows us that seeds can lie dormant for years, so one lives in hope. And it was Andrew Davidson who started me on DYKs. Perhaps it goes all the way back to Bernard of Chartres. Edwardx (talk) 11:36, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Jess Wade lecturing on academic notability at Imperial College

Edwardx, Philafrenzy, Ritchie333...and others I know (many now and I believe some from countries far away)... I am touched. Definitely not grown up yet. I am reading the above and feeling emotional. Whispyhistory (talk) 05:19, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm only a fairly recent attendee at the Meetup but can concur with the above. We shouldn't be treating each other any different online from how we do in person, but it's easily done. You forget there's another human being at the end of the line. It's been a pleasure to get to know the people mentioned above, and it always raises a smile when I see their names on wiki, such as when Ritchie did a GA review and Whispyhistory reviewed the subsequent DYK. (Which reminds me, I should have a look at Kensington Olympia for you... Will try to find the time this weekend!) Thanks, and keep up the good work.  — Amakuru (talk) 07:47, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I have indeed attended several events with Jess Wade and she is typically an organiser or speaker. In the picture (right), which I took a few weeks ago, she is lecturing students and faculty about the guideline for academic notability on Wikipedia. She has written hundreds of such articles now and so may reasonably be considered an expert on the matter. She's doing fine and so attempts to advise her risk being seen as mansplaining. The people who seem most out of their depth and in need of assistance are the others mixed up in this, including Netholic, Rama and Lancewiggs. It seems especially outrageous that the latter should have been indeffed so peremptorily, when others seem to have licence to be as rude as they like, but so it goes. A farce is a good way of describing it because when I tell ordinary folk that such articles might be deleted, they are incredulous – they don't understand what we are playing at. Andrew D. (talk) 18:31, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

This is why I have mentioned WP:REALWORLD in several discussions recently, drawing particular attention to "Those outside readers, organizations and individuals will also read your words in the context of generally understood meanings, not Wikipedia-specific definitions. Appeal to Wikipedia rules and processes will not save you from misunderstandings or real-world consequences." I do plenty of things that have nothing to do with WP, and most people are at best indifferent about it, and at worst cynical because they know somebody whose edit was reverted or whose article was deleted. It's pretty much what drives my entire working process here and what makes me tick. I am not really that familiar with Dr Wade's work other than the odd AfD rescue; I don't mind discussing improvements to specific articles, such as the work I did on Abbie Hutty and its related DYK. But as I said over on ANI, we need a collaborative environment to make that happen, not have people coming along with a 24 inch clipboard detailing exactly what policies you violated and what the appropriate punishments will be. I am not happy about Lance's block, as you can probably tell; it doesn't take much effort to do a quick search on the name and discover that simply because the account has only a few edits, does not mean their opinion is not valid. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:49, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

I'll also save the drama chat for the meet up. We can discuss it over a Christmas ale. That Victoria line project sounds interesting though. I might muck in and try to do one or two of them: I need a new project and had in mind to do some precolonial Rwanda stuff, but the sources I have are incredibly terse and difficult to construct decent articles from in the time I have available. Stations can be a quick win therefore. I was looking at Brixton just now and saw the reference to the old East Brixton station. That was a crazy looking thing. Sort of like a portacabin on stilts...  — Amakuru (talk) 21:19, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Amakuru What sources do you have for pre-colonial Rwanda? Do you have access to Senate House Library or UCL Library? Philafrenzy (talk) 12:46, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

@Philafrenzy: these are some of the titles I own:

• David Newbury (2009). The Land beyond the Mists: Essays on Identity and Authority in Precolonial Congo and Rwanda. Ohio University Press.
• Jan Vansina (2005). Antecedents to Modern Rwanda: The Nyiginya Kingdom. James Currey.
• Aimable Twagilimana (2007). Historical Dictionary of Rwanda. Scarecrow Press.
• Catharine Newbury (1988). The Cohesion of Oppression: Clientship and Ethnicity in Rwanda, 1860-1960. Columbia University Press.

I also have excerpts from some others, such as "Defeat is the only Bad News" by Alison des Forges and "Rwanda Before the Genocide" by JJ Carney which I accessed by visiting the British Library. I don't have access to either of those other libraries you mention, as far as I know. Is it possible for an outsider to gain access? Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 11:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I have some African history lurking somewhere I know. I will check. Yes I know a back door. You will need to bribe me with tea at the next meetup to find out. I assume that you have signed up for Jstor with the Wikipedia Library? Philafrenzy (talk) 14:42, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I have all of these, apart from Vol. 2 for some reason, plus the UNESCO General History of Africa is available as a free CCBYSA download. Not sure how current it is, or indeed if it was subject to political interference. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:10, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrator account security (Correction to Arbcom 2019 special circular)

ArbCom would like to apologise and correct our previous mass message in light of the response from the community.

Since November 2018, six administrator accounts have been compromised and temporarily desysopped. In an effort to help improve account security, our intention was to remind administrators of existing policies on account security — that they are required to "have strong passwords and follow appropriate personal security practices." We have updated our procedures to ensure that we enforce these policies more strictly in the future. The policies themselves have not changed. In particular, two-factor authentication remains an optional means of adding extra security to your account. The choice not to enable 2FA will not be considered when deciding to restore sysop privileges to administrator accounts that were compromised.

We are sorry for the wording of our previous message, which did not accurately convey this, and deeply regret the tone in which it was delivered.

For the Arbitration Committee, -Cameron11598 21:04, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Westway (London), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hackney (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kensington (Olympia) station

The article Kensington (Olympia) station you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Kensington (Olympia) station for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amakuru -- Amakuru (talk) 14:22, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

DYK for Queen Elizabeth II (painting)

On 12 May 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Queen Elizabeth II (painting), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in a 2016 portrait, the Queen is depicted with someone else's bust? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Queen Elizabeth II (painting). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Queen Elizabeth II (painting)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

bizarre edits

Hi... I noticed this article has been having bizarre edits. Can you advise...I usually undo but looks messy. Whispyhistory (talk) 14:47, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

@Whispyhistory: I reverted back to your version - people editing without any summaries is unhelpful as you have to a brief forensic examination and guess what they were trying to do. Sitush and Vanamonde93 are more experienced with Indian history than I am, and I think both of them have had serious battle scars from disruptive editors; in particular, the India / Pakistan dispute, and related POV pushing from that, is something I prefer to run full speed away from in the other direction and find some pictures of kittens to look at. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:08, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks..I'll keep them in mind. Whispyhistory (talk) 15:12, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

"Battle scars" is about right...I've been watching that article for a while; it tends to attract that sort of tinkering. On some occasions it's related to tweaking descriptions of his ideology to match perceptions of his supporters (or detractors); sometimes it's seemingly aimless, as in this latest set of edits. I am of the opinion that the page needs indefinite semi-protection, but other admins have disagreed with me at RFPP about that, IIRC, so I haven't done anything further about it. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:20, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you @Vanamonde93:...I may look at it in more detail "one day". Whispyhistory (talk) 15:26, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Dick Smith

Don't be a Dick

This is an odd one that I came across on prod patrol. The article has been around for ages and, on the face of it, the person sounds quite notable. But I'm not finding much in the way of sources so maybe it's a hoax. Anyway, I'm not touching it because it's not really my scene and it has a BLPPROD on it. Please check it out, if you would. Andrew D. (talk) 19:11, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

I've done a quick search for sources and can't find anything, which is bizarre. If this isn't a hoax, I would expect at least one interview with a guitar magazine to come up in a search, but absolutely nothing comes up. I'm tempted to zap it per WP:G3, but to be sure, leave the BLP PROD on. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:22, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

... actually, played in the Hampton Grease Band, sideman for Aretha, Muscle Shoals sessions and won three Emmys and there's no sources? Tommy Tedesco he ain't. Deleted per G3. Shout out to Finnusertop for noticing. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:28, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

• Ok, but what do you make of this video which I found after posting the above? Is that a hoax too or what? Just curious... Andrew D. (talk) 19:49, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

It's a truly bizarre cut and paste of videos interspersed with shots of Mr Smith, without proving he had anything to do with the claims specified. Google "Richard Smith Emmy" and note the complete and utter absence of any reliable, independent, third party sources. I'll get a second opinion off Iridescent and will happily eat a family-sized helping of humble pie if I've called this incorrectly, but I'm not seeing the evidence. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:56, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I was curious about this and from looking around I think he probably is a real person. I'm tempted to believe the role in Ray (film) is genuine as well as playing with Earth Wind & Fire, and possibly even the backing guitar and albums etc. See [1] (which has wording suspiciously similar to the article) as well as [2][3]. The Emmys thing seems a stretch though, as you say there's no record, unless someone mixed him up with Dick Smith, the makeup artist.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:22, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Definitely a real person; the reason you're getting few hits on "Dick Smith" is because he's now going under the name "Richard Alan Smith". Here's his current website. A Google search on "richard alan smith" guitarist brings up assorted videos of him doing his thing. Whether he warrants a bio is another matter, as while there are a fair few local radio spots and the like there doesn't seem to be anything constituting significant coverage. ‑ Iridescent 21:22, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

So why do I get no independent reliable sources when I search for "Richard Alan Smith EWF"? As you say, there seems to be a real guy who is a guitarist and teacher, but without evidence linking him to the information in that biography, I think it has to remain deleted. It would have done per BLP PROD anyway. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:27, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

He's listed on the lineup history on the official EWF website, who presumably know. It looks like he was a long-term session man rather than a full official member, as he's under "Many talented musicians have performed with Earth, Wind & Fire" rather than the main lineup. ‑ Iridescent 21:32, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

@Iridescent: you've pretty much found the same pages as I found above - I guess that probably is all there is out there. I tried quite hard to prize him out of the Emmys website but without success. Either he's puffing himself up, or someone mixed him up with the makeup guy. Doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG on this evidence anyway.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:37, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

There's more of him here. I've checked the history of all the awards he says he's won, but can't find anything (that doesn't necessarily prove anything if he's working as part of a team composing movie scores, but I'd expect to find something). Since there doesn't seem to be any independent coverage, he doesn't meet GNG regardless. ‑ Iridescent 21:43, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Mr Smith himself, aka User:Monkeyfingers, is the original author of the article - here he is complaining about its first deletion in 2011. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:11, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Check this out, please

Series of reverts: it appears I may have reverted IP 68.96.20.126 and they decided to retaliate by targeting a series of my edits right down the line. I'm fixing the ones that need fixing but please look into this.

diff, diff, diff, diff, diff, diff, diff, diff, diff, diff

Thanks in advance, ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:40, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

I've dropped them a note. If they kick up a fuss, I'll block 'em. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:55, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Thx, Ritchie...^Atsme _Talk 📧 21:10, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

To paraphrase "Up The Junction" ... "I'll block 'em for recklessness, but blocking's not my business" Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:51, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

The IP returned and reverted all the edits in troll-like behavior. I'm to the point that I'm beyond caring anymore. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 03:57, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) New IP blocked, Crayfish semi'd for a week; clearly either an intent to harass, or complete disregard for consensus building. But don't call them a vandal, please, Atsme; there's many types of disruptive editors who are not vandals. It undermines our ability to deal with them, too, because they can now play the victim and complain that they were wrongly accused of vandalism. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:16, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Ok, but please know that I waited until the last few reverts, and ran out of reasons for why I had to revert. By then, it was rather obvious they vandalized the articles and targeted my edits to harass and I have an idea that it was probably the result of my work in NPP or AfC. Thank you for hopefully resolving the issue, Vanamonde. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 13:03, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Oh, wait...I just realized there are 2 IPs geolocating to the same area - 68.96.20.126 and 69.63.112.226. Vanamonde93 does your block cover both? ^Atsme _Talk 📧 13:54, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

It looks like a standard rotating IP for a home service provider, so the previous IP is probably located to someone else, so there's no need to block it. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:12, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

AeroCóndor

not a valid CSD {{db|1=Hello. I have a problem. I have renamed the article '''AeroCóndor''', which was misnamed, to '''Aerocondor Colombia''' because this is how the company is known worldwide. Now the linking with the other languages ​​does not work. I hope that if the article '''AeroCóndor''' is deleted, the correct link will be possible. Many thanks for the help. Greetings.}}

Some explanation? why not? the problem continues and I do not know what to do! please I need help. Thank you EBAQ (talk) 11:48, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Reformatted to remove the transcluded deletion nomination and resolved the issue on Wikidata. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:55, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18

Hello Ritchie333,

WMF at work on NPP Improvements

Niharika Kohli, a product manager for the growth team, announced that work is underway in implementing improvements to New Page Patrol as part of the 2019 Community Wishlist and suggests all who are interested watch the project page on meta. Two requested improvements have already been completed. These are:

• Allow filtering by no citations in page curation
• Not having CSD and PRODs automatically marked as reviewed, reflecting current consensus among reviewers and current Twinkle functionality.

Reliable Sources for NPP

Rosguill has been compiling a list of reliable sources across countries and industries that can be used by new page patrollers to help judge whether an article topic is notable or not. At this point further discussion is needed about if and how this list should be used. Please consider joining the discussion about how this potentially valuable resource should be developed and used.

Backlog drive coming soon

Look for information on the an upcoming backlog drive in our next newsletter. If you'd like to help plan this drive, join in the discussion on the New Page Patrol talk page.

News

• Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Discussions of interest

• A request for bot approval for a bot to patrol two kinds of redirects
• There has been a lot discussion about Notability of Academics
• What, if anything, would a SNG for Softball look like

Six Month Queue Data: Today – 7242 Low – 2393 High – 7250

---

Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of DannyS712 (talk) at 19:17, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of MCG Heatlh Page

Could we move the page to a draftspace at the very least so that I can work on improving the page? I believe their system of measuring care is useful to have a page on. Ooooboy1090 (talk) 21:25, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

While I'm normally amenable to restoring pages to userspace, we have had huge problems with the past with articles on medicine and health related companies. In particular, Wikipedia has a whole set of policies related sources applicable to medicine (because while people shouldn't consult Wikipedia over a doctor, people expect what they read about to be true and reflect mainstream science). I would prefer to get a brief consensus from the various admins who hang out on my talk page first before putting this in userspace. (Does anybody else miss Jytdog?) Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:53, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

I know what you mean. What if I did a stub on the fact they produce evidence based clinical guidelines that a lot of health plans rely on. That would seem to help clarify the "not relying on Wikipedia" -- and of course, happy to wait till others weigh in. Ooooboy1090 (talk) 19:47, 17 May 2019 (UTC)