 |
 |
If you find this site useful or just support what I'm doing, I'd really appreciate if you could donate. To cover server costs and for the hundreds of hours I've put into making this happen.
|
 |
If you spot content on this site that is genuinely illegal or actually puts someone in real danger, contact [email protected]. We have multiple agents reviewing tickets 24/7. Note that we try to maintain as much transparency as possible, both about ourselves and of the actions of Wikipedians. For example, if we removed a live link to CSAM content that was posted by a Wikipedia admin, we would replace it a placeholder like "<link to CSAM that was posted by Demiurge1000 redacted by Undersight>". Note that "I don't like it" is NOT a valid removal reason. If instead you are a Wikipedophile trying to get all the dark secrets of Wikipedia censored, please follow this guide instead.
If you would like to contact the owner of this about something else (e.g. press inquires, feature requests, bug reports), e-mail [email protected] or [email protected].
|
Revision 898368015 of "Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents" on enwiki{{short description|Page for reporting and discussing incidents that require the intervention of administrators and experienced editors}}
<noinclude><!-- Inside the noinclude, because this page is transcluded.-->{{Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentsHeader}}</noinclude>__TOC__{{clear}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{Administrators' noticeboard navbox all}}
|maxarchivesize = 800K
|counter = 1010
|algo = old(72h)
|key = 740a8315fa94aa42eb96fbc48a163504d444ec0297a671adeb246c17b137931c
|archive = Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive%(counter)d
|headerlevel=2
}}
<!--
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|header={{Administrators' noticeboard navbox all}}
|archiveprefix=Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive
|format=%%i
|age=72
|index=no
|numberstart=826
|archivenow={{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}sk
|minarchthreads= 1
|minkeepthreads= 4
|maxarchsize= 7
|key=d85a96a0151d501b0ad3ba6060505c0c
|headerlevel=2
}} --><!--
NEW ENTRIES GO AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE NOT HERE
NEW ENTRIES GO AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE NOT HERE
NEW ENTRIES GO AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE NOT HERE-->
== Slugger O'Toole ==
I am raising a concern of [[WP:HOUNDING]] against [[User:Slugger O'Toole]]. On 9 May they directly reverted two edits I had made to the article on [[Brian Sims]] despite not previously being active on this [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brian_Sims&type=revision&diff=896291899&oldid=896291690 article] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brian_Sims&type=revision&diff=896290264&oldid=896277211 this] to change protest to prayer, and reciting to prayer. Only a few weeks earlier on 18 April I had raised concerns with them about hounding when they followed me to the article on the [[Lavender Hill Mob (gay activist group)]] to revert and change my edits [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lavender_Hill_Mob_%28gay_activist_group%29&type=revision&diff=892968980&oldid=892966698 here] is just one of these). I have previously raised these concerns with administrators to flag how in October 2018 this editor (when called BrianCUA) reverted my edits to [[Reinhard Marx]] and admitted that they had never visited that page before [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Slugger_O%27Toole/Archive_5#Reinhard_Marx admission on their talk page]. It is my belief that this editor is passionately supportive of issues pertaining to the Roman Catholic church, and that they do not like edits which are critical of the Catholic church, its members of organisations - even if the material supports this reading. They are particularly defensive when the matter of homosexuality or gay rights conflicts with official Church teaching or actions. I feel I am constantly being inhibited from editing - I am trying to improve articles in good faith and accept instances of where things can be improved or errors corrected. But I am being chased around and being made to feel like I have to justify every edit I make until this editor is content with the outcome from their point of view. Thank you.[[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 22:58, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
:This is almost silly. If you read the conversation we had in August 2018 about Reinhard Marx, I clearly explained why I was there, and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Slugger_O%27Toole&diff=prev&oldid=857351939 Contaldo responded]: "That's great. No offence taken." Now, eight months later, he is using it as evidence that I am hounding him? As for the Lavender Hill Mob article, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dissent_from_Catholic_teaching_on_homosexuality&diff=892952145&oldid=892807210 he linked to it] in an article in which we are both very active. That's how I came across it. I wasn't monitoring his edit history and then chasing him around, trying to inhibit his editing. If you look at his edit history, in fact, you will see many, many articles in which he is active and I am not. When Contaldo adds relevant content that is reliably sourced, he gets no push back from me. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 23:36, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
::Reinhard Marx and the Lavender Hill Mob are examples that show this is a repeat and sustained pattern. Would you like to explain why you visited the article on Brian Sims and changed my edits specifically? And I would ask that you don't dismiss my concerns as "silly". Your intention is simply to intimidate and WP:HOUND. Administrators I ask you to check the article on Brian Sims and consider whether it is acceptable for this editor to come and remove my wording after never having been at that article before. Thank you.[[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 22:25, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
:::1) Regarding Reinhard Marx, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Slugger_O%27Toole&diff=prev&oldid=857332798 you yourself said] "I'm sure that it wasn't your aim at all to hound me and your edit changes seem a sensible one." 2) I have already explained how I came to the Lavender Hill Mob. 3) Yes, please check out the Sims article, and particularly the talk page, where I engaged in [[Talk:Brian_Sims#Video_controversy_section|a civil and rational discussion]] and came to a consensus with another editor before moving the prose to the main page. Sims was in the news recently, which is how I presume you got there. 4) Your last 100 edits include [[Damares Alves]], [[True Cross]], [[Macarius of Jerusalem]], [[Helena (empress)]], [[List of sexually active popes]], [[Donatello]], and [[Frederick the Great]], all of which relate to Catholicism and/or homosexuality. I have not been active on any of them. That's a pretty weak pattern. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 00:23, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
::::I haven't come to this board to have a debate with you (another example of your hounding style); I have come to make a complaint and have asked administrators to look into that. With regards to Marx it was clear to me that you were hounding but I decided to overlook it in attempt to reduce conflict (my comments were an ironic warning and should be read that way). You can say what you like about discussion on the Sims talk page but I think your argument that "it was in the news" is disingenuous and dishonest. You specifically targeted my edits because you didn't like them - that was your main motivation for visiting the page. This is hounding; this is not acceptable. There is a persistent pattern. And thanks for pointing out that you've had a good look at my recent editing history! I've made my complaint and I don't intend to justify it further to you. If people have concerns then it doesn't help to harass them and intimidate them in the hope they will simply shrink away.[[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 00:31, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::Administrators may also want to look at the edit warring noticeboard where Slugger is trying to intimidate again and risks abusing the process. Four editors have expressed a view contrary to Slugger on inclusion of material on the Lavender Hill Mob; despite this Slugger decided to report me for edit-warring as a way to silence me even though the overwhelming consensus is against them on this point. Are these sort of behaviours really the ones we want to see on Wikipedia? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Contaldo80 reported by User:Slugger O'Toole (Result: No violation)) [[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 02:45, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::When I reported Congtaldo for edit warring, the dispute was just between two people. Now that a consensus has emerged, I have abided by it. I would also suggest that the consensus emerged because I put out a RfC. I am not trying to silence anyone. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 14:38, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::::You may suggest that but it has no bearing in reality. That consensus was there before your RfC. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 00:09, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::::I'm not trying to be argumentative, but you may wish to check the timestamps. I asked for the RFC at 10:49 am on May 14, 2019. After I hit save, I saw your comment and responded a minute later. At that point you Contaldo and I were the only people who had commented. I don't think I would call that a consensus. A few new people came after that, I presume that as a result of the RFC, and then a consensus was made clear. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 00:49, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::::::Additionally you removed the material again on 15 May at 15:00 well after your RfC had revealed a consensus against removing the material. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lavender_Hill_Mob_%28gay_activist_group%29&type=revision&diff=897215373&oldid=89721507 As shown here] [[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 01:42, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::::::You have asked this question twice. I will answer it once below. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 02:03, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
*It's not easy to prove hounding from a limited set of diffs. The explanation for how they got to Sims might well be correct. But at the same time, did Slugger O'Toole [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brian_Sims&diff=896291690&oldid=896290264 really use the Daily Caller] as a source in a BLP? And I am familiar with their supposed "civil and rational discussion" on talk pages from a minor dispute at [[Talk:Lavender Hill Mob (gay activist group)]], where the talk page presents an editor who doesn't really care much about consensus. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 02:59, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
::Yes, I did use it. And then, if you read the talk page, you will see that [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Brian_Sims&diff=896331905&oldid=896326913 I apologized for using it] as I didn't know it was a prohibited source. Once that fact was pointed out to me, I didn't use it again. You will also see from that same dif that I explicitly told the editor who reverted me that I wanted to work with him to develop a consensus and then did exactly that. We worked out compromise language on talk and now the article is stable. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 14:40, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
*HOUNDING allegation notwithstanding but I noticed the name come up and I have a slightly different concern that his username may be a [[WP:UPOL]] violation as it seems to imply association with the [[Slugger O'Toole]] newsblog. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.5em 0.5em 0.6em;"> '''[[User:The C of E|<font color="red">The C of E </font><font color="blue"> God Save the Queen!</font>]]''' ([[User talk:The C of E|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]])</span> 15:09, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
::That issue [[Wikipedia:Changing_username/Usurpations/Completed/51#Briancua_→_Slugger_O'toole|was addressed previously]]. A fictional character was the inspiration for both my name and that of the blog. Nice catch, though. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 15:19, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
:::My apologies {{ping|Slugger O'Toole}}. I had missed that one. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.5em 0.5em 0.6em;"> '''[[User:The C of E|<font color="red">The C of E </font><font color="blue"> God Save the Queen!</font>]]''' ([[User talk:The C of E|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]])</span> 15:26, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
::::No need for an apology. I miss far more than that (as has been alluded to above!). --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 15:55, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::You are right to raise concerns The C of E. Slugger O'Toole previously operated under the username of BrianCUA - but changed it after it was pointed out that this implied association with the Catholic University of America. As you will see there is a pattern of far from ideal behaviours. Frankly I'd like to see some sort of topic ban in relation to articles on Catholicism.[[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 01:22, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::Someone raised a concern about my username. Upon reflection, I determined that the concern had merit. I then took steps to rectify the situation. I'm not sure how this is poor behavior, much less demonstrative of a pattern of the same. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 19:31, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
*I'm not familiar with the articles leading to the current WP:HOUND concern, but I concur with the need for greater attention to be paid to Slugger's tendentious editing on Catholicism-related topics. I have [[Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard/Archive_75#Slugger_O'Toole_disruptive_editing_on_Catholicism|previously noted]] his tendency to edit against explicit consensus in this topic area and make false claims about the views expressed by other users, with the aim of pushing a non-neutral point of view. <small>Contaldo posted on my talk page about this issue, but it's not what brought me here; I watchlist ANI.</small> –[[User:Roscelese|Roscelese]] ([[User talk:Roscelese|talk]] ⋅ [[Special:Contributions/Roscelese|contribs]]) 02:32, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
::The discussion on the talk page for [[Talk:The Lavender Hill Mob (gay activist group)]] is a classic example of this frankly. Slugger ignored the consensus established by 6 separate editors concerning the mention of the death of Marty Robinson by AIDS (the individual was active in his opposition to the teachings of the Catholic church regarding the non-use of condoms); and continued to remove the material despite editors agreeing it should stay. [[User:Drmies]] quite rightly called him out. They then went to the trouble of creating a new article on [[Marty Robinson]] so that they could remove the AIDS-related fact from the earlier article - and making a very poor job of creating a new article at the same time and creating more work for editors such as [[User:Yngvadottir]] to fix. Highly disruptive and issues around neutral editing. I accept the point that it's difficult to demonstrate HOUNDING and not coincidental editing of a page on an item in the news - but the fact is that one of the immediate things Slugger did on the [[Brian Sims]] page was to specifically revert my edits in relation to Catholic religious practice. [[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 22:37, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
:::I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lavender_Hill_Mob_(gay_activist_group)&diff=next&oldid=897284989 have stated] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lavender_Hill_Mob_(gay_activist_group)&diff=next&oldid=897285589 multiple times] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lavender_Hill_Mob_(gay_activist_group)&diff=next&oldid=897286970 on that page] that I respect the consensus. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 00:53, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
::::And yet you removed material after such a consensus had been indicated and was in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lavender_Hill_Mob_%28gay_activist_group%29&type=revision&diff=897215373&oldid=897215078 place]. So why did you do that? [[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 01:35, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::As I have explained [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lavender_Hill_Mob_(gay_activist_group)&diff=897434675&oldid=897420057 multiple] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lavender_Hill_Mob_(gay_activist_group)&diff=next&oldid=897439866 times] on that article's talk page, it was at the suggestion of another user. He believed, as I did, that once "someone can write an article on him... it would more logically belong there." Drmies, who is to the best of my knowledge the only administrator involved in that discussion, then instructed me to "write the article." So, I created a new article and placed that information there. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 02:03, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
[[User:Drmies]] - can I check that you "instructed [Slugger] to write the article" on [[Marty Robinson]]? This wasn't quite my understanding of the debate but perhaps I've misunderstood. Thanks [[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 23:28, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::I didn't "instruct" anyone to write the article; anyone can see what comment of Slugger's prompted my [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lavender_Hill_Mob_(gay_activist_group)&diff=897106035&oldid=897087349 "then write the article"]. And every one who looks at my entire comment can see what I thought of the editor's work, and of their efforts to try and erase this person from the article. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 23:49, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Thanks. This was my understanding too. They also misrepresented what [[user:Hughesdarren]] said on the same [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lavender_Hill_Mob_(gay_activist_group) page]. Personally I don't think this is acceptable. [[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 04:27, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::::I do feel that my comments were cherry picked and misrepresented by Slugger and have left a comment on the article talk page. I have also found the user to be problematic on the [[Lavender Hill Mob (gay activist group)]] article, particularly ignoring the consensus of the group. [[User:Hughesdarren|Hughesdarren]] ([[User talk:Hughesdarren|talk]]) 11:36, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Further to the discussion around [[Brian Sims]] I want to draw attention to the issue on the administrator's noticeboard raised by [[User:JesseRafe]] [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive309#Brian_Sims here]] raising concerns about users (including Slugger O'Toole) "adding undue weight, using non-NPOV language" and "using weasel words or otherwise "gamey" tricks of the language to make the BLP subject of the article sound condemned in Wikipedia's voice". Especially the edit on 9 May which directly over-turned my edits of "recite" to replace with perceived stronger Roman Catholic terminology and material that created a more negative image of a gay man challenging the teaching of the Catholic Church - [[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brian_Sims&type=revision&diff=896325023&oldid=896317205 here]]. The editors seem to have eventually reached some sort of accommodation but this is another example of Slugger's questionable behaviours across a range of articles and impacting on a broad range of other editors.[[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 23:38, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:I was unaware of the ANI notice linked to above, and would again direct people to [[Talk:Brian_Sims#Video_controversy_section|read the conversation]] JesseRafe and I had on talk where he pointed out a few policies of which I was unaware. I then apologized, thanked him for bringing them to my attention, and then promised not to run afoul of them again. Jesse also said "Thank you for your calm response. I may have over-reacted because..." of some very valid reasons. We then worked out a consensus version on talk and moved it to the main. This is, I believe, exactly how the process is supposed to work. Like with the discussion about my username above, I don't believe this is a "questionable behavior," despite Contaldo's best efforts to cast aspersions. --[[User:Slugger O'Toole|Slugger O'Toole]] ([[User talk:Slugger O'Toole|talk]]) 13:17, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
== ZebraDX3.1 [[WP:NOTHERE]] ==
*{{userlinks|ZebraDX3.1}}
This user has used talk pages as [[WP:NOTAFORUM|a forum]] multiple times in the last few weeks. I believe a [[WP:NOTHERE]] block is warranted.
*[[Special:Diff/895089160]] - "Btw 4 days to day till my b day"
*[[Special:Diff/896983801]] - "Holy Crap What a dream match! You guys ready for Undertaker and Goldberg to clash! Who will be Next or Who will Rest In Peace!"
*[[Special:Diff/897038949]] - "In the beginning it should say 'Goldberg vs The Undertaker is a dream match for some fans..' btw who do you think will win."
'''[[User:NotTheFakeJTP|<span style="color: red">JTP</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:NotTheFakeJTP|talk]] • [[Special:Contribs/NotTheFakeJTP|contribs]])</sup>''' 02:11, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
*[[User:ZebraDX3.1]], you need to shit or get off the pot. We're here to edit, not to chat about rassling or birthdays. This is not a gift-giving community anyway. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 03:05, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
**Unnecessarily harsh response. (Whether or not this contributor is a young person.) <span style="white-space:nowrap;">– [[User:Levivich|Leviv]]<span style="display:inline-block;position:relative;transform:rotate(45deg);bottom:-.57em;">[[User Talk:Levivich|ich]]</span></span> 18:24, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
*'''Warn'''. Behavior is not malicious, or fit for ANI. {{ping|ZebraDX3.1}} this isn't really what Wikipedia is for. Would you actually like to contribute to our articles in a way that meets our [[WP:PAG|policies and guidelines?]] <span style="font-family:Courier New;font-size:3">[[User:The Wordsmith|'''The Wordsmith''']]</span><sup>[[User talk:The Wordsmith|Talk to me]]</sup> 03:23, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' Honestly if this continues they need to be blocked, the majority of their edits are forum-like talk page posts. The few to mainspace are unsourced for the most part. Probably needs to be warned once more though, only has one warning at the moment. '''[[User:STATicVapor|StaticVapor]] <small>[[User talk:STATicVapor|<span style="vertical-align:super;">message me!</span>]]</small>''' 05:23, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
* [[User:ZebraDX3.1]] Hello and I want to apologize for what ever I did is there anything I can do to get of this I just started editing and I did not know so please is there anything I can do to get off of this. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:ZebraDX3.1|ZebraDX3.1]] ([[User talk:ZebraDX3.1#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/ZebraDX3.1|contribs]]) 01:34, 17 May 2019 (UTC)</small>
:: {{ping|ZebraDX3.1}} Do not worry, just do not post anything on talk pages not related to changes to a Wikipedia article and make sure you cite sources when you make changes. '''[[User:STATicVapor|StaticVapor]] <small>[[User talk:STATicVapor|<span style="vertical-align:super;">message me!</span>]]</small>''' 05:34, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
== HelpMeStopSpam ==
{{Userlinks|HelpMeStopSpam}}
The user is an SPA claiming to be with VICE who has left a couple of bizarre messages on [[User talk:HelpUsStopSpam]]'s talk page (including a request to interview them). I'm not sure what to do about it - definitely looks like [[WP:NOTHERE]], but I don't know if they've violated any specific policies yet. [[User:Creffett|creffett]] ([[User talk:Creffett|talk]]) 15:00, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
:Have they only made a couple of edits? But, yeah—both usernames suggest [[WP:RGW]] even if they mean well with it. [[User:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:black">'''——'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:black">''SerialNumber''</span>]][[User talk:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:#8B0000">54129</span>]] 15:04, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
:What the hell is VICE?[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 15:03, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
::I believe it's a magazine or online publication of some kind. [[User:Reyk|<b style="color: Maroon;">Reyk</b>]] <sub>[[User talk:Reyk|<b style="color: Blue;">YO!</b>]]</sub> 15:04, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
::This all looks a bit stale, why raise it now?[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 15:05, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
:::{{u|Slatersteven}}, 10 hours is stale?? [[User:Cabayi|Cabayi]] ([[User talk:Cabayi|talk]]) 15:11, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
::::Sorry I was looking at the talk page discussion as is, the ones you are referring to were removed, diff would have been nice. Yes these edits look like the user is not here.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 15:16, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::Whoops, sorry, didn't think about that. For other editors' reference, diff of the talk page commentary is at [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:HelpUsStopSpam&diff=prev&oldid=897192037&diffmode=source], and VICE refers to [[Vice Media]]. I agree, HelpUsStopSpam is here to [[WP:RGW]] and probably should be looked at closer, but HelpMeStopSpam is just [[WP:NOTHERE]], I'm just not sure what the correct approach is to deal with it so I raised it here. [[User:Creffett|creffett]] ([[User talk:Creffett|talk]]) 16:00, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::::Well as its an SPA, that clear has an agenda (and this a history) relating to digging up dirt I think a block, indef of coarse. Normally I would not go for the block straight away, but there is history here, and I doubt this is a new user.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 16:18, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::Since he (HMSS) explicitly claims to be editing for vice there are [[WP:COI|conflict of interest]] and UPE issues. {{tq|'''We''' are contacting}} suggests shared account issues. But... having not got the interview he was after, I guess we've probably seen the last of him. [[User:Cabayi|Cabayi]] ([[User talk:Cabayi|talk]]) 16:22, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::::Would it be possible to see if <s>either of them</s> HMSS would be willing to explain just what they're doing here? I can get if you're asking for an interview with someone, but I would imagine this should have been done far more discreetly and would be targeted to a specific known editor. —[[User:Jéské Couriano|<i style="color: #1E90FF;">A little blue Bori</i>]] [[User talk:Jéské Couriano|<span style="color: #228B22">v^_^v</span>]] <sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/Jéské Couriano|Bori!]]</small></sup> 20:08, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
: Thanks {{u|creffett}} for already bringing this here - I would have done this myself now.
: The whole "vice" thing is likely just fake. The "bizarre" requests already indicate that he is torn between trying to insult/attack me and trying to dox. Obviously, anyone looking into Wikipedia spam would be interviewing about the big cases such as Orangemoody and Wiki-PR, and I have no knowledge of these beyond what is written in their Wikipedia articles.
: Most likely, -wrong suspicion removed to protect the innocent- [[User:HelpUsStopSpam|HelpUsStopSpam]] ([[User talk:HelpUsStopSpam|talk]]) 21:01, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
::So based on this, he should be blocked for harassment and/or being a sock? —[[User:Jéské Couriano|<i style="color: #1E90FF;">A little blue Bori</i>]] [[User talk:Jéské Couriano|<span style="color: #228B22">v^_^v</span>]] <sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/Jéské Couriano|Bori!]]</small></sup> 21:53, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
:::It clearly is a SPA to harass me. I cannot prove it is a sock, a checkuser may or may not. [[User:HelpUsStopSpam|HelpUsStopSpam]] ([[User talk:HelpUsStopSpam|talk]]) 01:16, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
*{{U|Bbb23}}, you blocked User:Tsma73. What do you think of this? [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 02:48, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
** Bbb23 is taking some much needed time away, {{u|Drmies}}. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 07:58, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
* {{noping|HelpMeStopSpam}} is on the same IP address as {{U|Wikitopcoder}} and {{U|Hencoder}}. Could be retaliation for {{diff2|896957707|this edit}}, I suppose. [[User:NinjaRobotPirate|NinjaRobotPirate]] ([[User talk:NinjaRobotPirate|talk]]) 09:59, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
:: Then my suspicion above was wrong. I do not see any connection between these two and aforementioned accounts. There is a third account spamming "open genus" to Wikipedia: {{u|Algo open}}. [[User:HelpUsStopSpam|HelpUsStopSpam]] ([[User talk:HelpUsStopSpam|talk]]) 13:02, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
::Something came up and I couldn't comment earlier, but I've blocked all three accounts. As {{u|NinjaRobotPirate}} said, they're all three on the same IP address. Given that the messages on the userpages of the older two accounts ({{tq|I am a PhD candidate at Harvard University...}} and {{tq|I am a PhD candidate at ITMO University, Russia...}}) are at odds with each other, that the IP address is nowhere near either of those institutions, and that all three accounts are technically indistinguishable, they're [[WP:NOTHERE|NOTHERE]] at best. —[[User:DoRD|DoRD]] ([[User talk:DoRD|talk]]) 14:39, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Thank you {{U|DoRD}}. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 16:49, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Another account, [[User:StopBiased]], popped up yesterday pulling similar crap on HUSS's talk page (only other edit was, for some reason, posting a nooby question on my Talk page), and has been added to those being blocked. So this isn't over, keep eyes open. --[[User:NatGertler|Nat Gertler]] ([[User talk:NatGertler|talk]]) 14:12, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
== The Pirate Bay official URL - possible linkspam or malware attack ==
{{userlinks|42.3.52.8}}
Got a problem here: From [[Talk:The Pirate Bay]] "Re [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Pirate_Bay&curid=1923870&diff=897482184&oldid=897477550 this edit]: the "official url" template is currently redirecting to https://tea0539.blogspot.com/p/the-pirate-bay_17.html which is most definitely not thepiratebay.org. There are characters in Chinese (''Green Tea News'' according to Google Translate). I'm not sure why this is happening and would welcome suggestions on this. Anyway, we can't link to something that is obviously not the official url." Please could the article be semi-protected until this is fixed.--'''''[[User:ianmacm|<span style="background:#88b;color:#cff;font-variant:small-caps">♦Ian<span style="background:#99c">Ma<span style="background:#aad">c</span></span>M♦</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ianmacm|(talk to me)]]</sup>''''' 10:22, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
*The same user has also done this at [[xHamster]].--'''''[[User:ianmacm|<span style="background:#88b;color:#cff;font-variant:small-caps">♦Ian<span style="background:#99c">Ma<span style="background:#aad">c</span></span>M♦</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ianmacm|(talk to me)]]</sup>''''' 10:42, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
::Also happening at [[1337x]] and several IPs repeatedly changing the underlying data at WikiData. [[User:Objective3000|O3000]] ([[User talk:Objective3000|talk]]) 11:21, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
:::This is why enwiki shouldn't rely on the spam-prone {{tl|Official website}} parameters from Wikidata. —[[User:DoRD|DoRD]] ([[User talk:DoRD|talk]]) 11:30, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
::::Posted about this on [[:wikidata:Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2019/05#Edit war on Q22663|WD:AN]]. [[User:Jo-Jo Eumerus|Jo-Jo Eumerus]] ([[User talk:Jo-Jo Eumerus|talk]], [[Special:CentralAuth/Jo-Jo Eumerus|contributions]]) 11:31, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::I've put some semi/PC on the Pirate Bay page. As noted, this is not the only article affected. Any Wikidata or meta admins might want to help out with some blocks and blacklisting. -- [[user:zzuuzz|zzuuzz]] <sup>[[user_talk:zzuuzz|(talk)]]</sup> 11:32, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
::::We definitely shouldn't rely on Wikidata for this type of official site. By "this type" I mean the kind of legally ambiguous (or unambiguously illegal in some cases) site that winds up switching domains regularly. There are a whole lot of efforts to trick people, hijack, duplicate, etc. The dark net drug markets get a ton of spam, which can be even harder to detect as in addition to the official site frequently changing, the url is a mostly random collection of characters so it can be hard to tell one from another. (of course, whether we should be including any such url at all is a separate conversation). For the safety of our readers, we need to have tight control over urls likely subject to abuse. — <samp>[[User:Rhododendrites|<span style="font-size:90%;letter-spacing:1px;text-shadow:0px -1px 0px Indigo;">Rhododendrites</span>]] <sup style="font-size:80%;">[[User_talk:Rhododendrites|talk]]</sup></samp> \\ 13:54, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::Personally, I don't think we should be using wikidata for anything. [[User:Reyk|<b style="color: Maroon;">Reyk</b>]] <sub>[[User talk:Reyk|<b style="color: Blue;">YO!</b>]]</sub> 14:12, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::I hear ya. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 17:27, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::{{ping|Rhododendrites}} If only you would let a WD admin like me know ''first'' before you write off the project's ability to fight spam. Semi-protection is all that's needed here.--[[User:Jasper Deng|Jasper Deng]] [[User talk:Jasper Deng|(talk)]] 06:54, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::{{ping|Jasper Deng}} A fair response. The issue isn't that Wikidata has no defense against vandals, though. I like Wikidata and see it as having a ton of potential, including developing mechanisms to protect against problematic edits. When it comes to fighting vandalism right now, though, enwiki is really very good most of the time, with lots of people and lots of tools that I just don't think Wikidata has yet. For example, if someone becomes autoconfirmed (a low barrier) and edits the url on Wikidata, how many people see it? If it's changed on enwiki, 617 people have the page watchlisted. A semi-protected Wikidata item may be more protection than many projects currently have, but it just makes less sense for sensitive content than a page 617 people are watching. Unless it's full protected, but I doubt anyone really wants that (I suspect you'd hear objections from those who see having material on Wikidata too much of a barrier to editing Wikipedia). Something that could work is that for particularly sensitive and/or likely vandalism targets, perhaps there's a way to full protect/lock just that statement? Or, more broadly, to lock anything that's actively in use by templates on another project, with something stronger than semiprotect on it? I'm just spitballing now, I suppose, in a way that's probably not suited to ANI. — <samp>[[User:Rhododendrites|<span style="font-size:90%;letter-spacing:1px;text-shadow:0px -1px 0px Indigo;">Rhododendrites</span>]] <sup style="font-size:80%;">[[User_talk:Rhododendrites|talk]]</sup></samp> \\ 13:06, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::::The WD community is quite distrustful of pegging any local access of any sort to the actions of another community (on the principle that we are not bound by the policies of other projects). Our autoconfirmed threshold is significantly higher than Wikipedia’s for a reason, and we also are pretty good with making abuse (edit) filters for this purpose. Anyone who is this concerned about these popular items should request that I protect them, not merely complain that we don’t do as much about the problem—especially as we have more items to watch over than articles here and more edits in 7 years than this wiki has had in 18 (yes, Wikidata has surpassed Wikipedia’s size in those metrics).—[[User:Jasper Deng|Jasper Deng]] [[User talk:Jasper Deng|(talk)]] 22:14, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::::This incident has made me wary of allowing parameters in enwiki articles to be changed on Wikidata. The problem is that enwiki editors may not be watching everything that happens over at Wikidata. Template vandalism is a serious problem, and templates on enwiki often have full protection so that IP or newly autoconfirmed users cannot vandalize them. I always remember [https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/07/milibandits-hack-cameron-wikipedia-page-vote-labour-vandalism-election this incident] in 2015 which led to media coverage.--'''''[[User:ianmacm|<span style="background:#88b;color:#cff;font-variant:small-caps">♦Ian<span style="background:#99c">Ma<span style="background:#aad">c</span></span>M♦</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ianmacm|(talk to me)]]</sup>''''' 06:14, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
The quality of vandal fighting at Wikidata? The [[Wikipedia:Editing policy]] (and the same at 28 other wiki languages) isn't called the same at Wikidata. No, since ''16 November 2018'' the name of the page in English has been "stupid prick" instead[https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q8302842&type=revision&diff=791791788&oldid=774079509]. Three days ago it also got an English description: "décription".[https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q8302842&diff=next&oldid=791791788]. Looking at "recent" changes in articles, since two days a [[fang]] is described as "a big ugly thing with a christmas tree"[https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q1940269&type=revision&diff=943970463&oldid=858696608]. [https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q6391456&type=revision&diff=943979375&oldid=421205764 This] is two days old. [[Jenna Marbles]] has grown 4 feet[https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q5306331&action=historysubmit&type=revision&diff=944083428&oldid=943928904].
Since nearly a week, at the top of [[Sony Pictures hack]] enwiki displays (in those environments that still show the Wikidata description) the subtitle "Kim Jong-un", caused by [https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q18642279&curid=20173277&diff=941317890&oldid=763078259 this]. We get serious BLP violations through this method, e.g. [[Trevor McMillan]] is said since 13 May to "Cuts staff while spending money on new buildings "[https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q313087&curid=301131&diff=941404737&oldid=892642508].
Oh, and [[Ammonia production]] has a vandal title at Wikidata since '''2013'''[https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q3961934&type=revision&diff=31276048&oldid=5558841]. No, I don't really trust Wikidata or its capability to handle vandalism. [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 07:02, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
*{{nacc}} It seem the spam of another blog in wikidata {{Q|32141}} is related. Despite the url is different, it had the same "author" (pseudonym) 绿茶新闻. [[User:Matthew hk|Matthew hk]] ([[User talk:Matthew hk|talk]]) 19:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:And then for the wikidata off-topic. May i had a templated warning in wikidata? So far i "handwritten" my own message to communicate with the vandals in English, but just like sister project wiki-common, they had templated warning plus some translation that can switch immediately . Can i had that system in wikidata ? [[User:Matthew hk|Matthew hk]] ([[User talk:Matthew hk|talk]]) 19:10, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::There should be serious consideration to a moratorium on using {{tl|Official website}} on enwiki. It is hard to keep a constant eye on what this link actually does when clicked, something that the vandals/spammers on Wikidata have already spotted. The high profile articles on enwiki are monitored and the problem with The Pirate Bay was noticed quickly, but other articles may be less lucky. Alternatively, Wikidata could make changing the official URL a feature available to administrators only.--'''''[[User:ianmacm|<span style="background:#88b;color:#cff;font-variant:small-caps">♦Ian<span style="background:#99c">Ma<span style="background:#aad">c</span></span>M♦</span>]] <sup>[[User_talk:ianmacm|(talk to me)]]</sup>''''' 04:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::The problem of wikidata itself, is there was even higher tech nerd barrier to edit it. I had to keep asking which Q is applicable to which P. And then lots of bot edit are wrong. I have to fix ill in zh-wiki as the redirect of related topic, does not mean it is the alias of the article. I have to create box in box in box entry for a complex business group, but sometimes i just bold not to split the entry when there is just the change in legal person and throw two Bloomberg id into the same wikidata entry. For obvious reason i don't think such a complex database need to be allow ip to edit. Definitely not enough admin is another small problem. Way more problem on too many troll ip edits that i seldom saw a good non-vandal edit by ip over there, way much worse that en-wiki that ip most of the time can assume good faith. [[User:Matthew hk|Matthew hk]] ([[User talk:Matthew hk|talk]]) 10:59, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Matthew hk}} The Foundation will never allow us to blanket restrict IP's from editing, however, we recently got consensus to implement a blanket semi-protection policy for items being used on a certain number of pages. What number is not decided, but there was consensus: [[wikidata:Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/semi-protection_to_prevent_vandalism_on_most_used_Items]]. One feature I have been meaning to request is a statement-granular form of protection, but I haven't yet.
::::In the meantime, anyone with serious concerns about it should simply add Wikidata changes to their watchlist. Patrolling it is no harder than here when yo udo that.
::::It is also wrong that Wikidata has "a higher tech nerd barrier to edit it". Your perspective is unrepresentative since you are accustomed to editing here. To the contrary, in IRL meetups, new users find Wikidata ''more'' intuitive to edit owing to its use of a GUI that is simpler than the arcane template syntax we use here.--[[User:Jasper Deng|Jasper Deng]] [[User talk:Jasper Deng|(talk)]] 23:40, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*Those who complain that Wikidata doesn't fight vandalism effectively are honestly, in a sense, part of the problem, and not the solution. If you are concerned about that, then you are more than welcome to participate in vandalism fighting on Wikidata. This can be as simple as showing Wikidata changes on your watchlist (see [[Special:Preferences]] and go to watchlist settings), and reporting vandalism to me or other admins. I admit we can get better, but part of it too is that not as many people explicitly patrol for vandalism on the project simply because we are a smaller community entrusted with a larger wiki.--[[User:Jasper Deng|Jasper Deng]] [[User talk:Jasper Deng|(talk)]] 23:40, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
== <nowiki>YoshiFan160</nowiki> ==
{{atop|Account blocked and tagged. Good catch. [[User:TomStar81|TomStar81]] ([[User talk:TomStar81|Talk]]) 09:11, 18 May 2019 (UTC)}}
{{u5|YoshiFan160}}
Normally an editor making various vandal edits to a page would draw various levels of warnings, but this account made 10 dummy edits, then successive page blanking edits to [[Hermione Granger]] and [[Rubeus Hagrid]]. Then the real clincher, they then went and page blanked [[Wikipedia:Protection policy]] and most tellingly [[Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/JarlaxleArtemis]]. A good faith account with less than 25 edits would certainly not know about the Protection policy much know where to find a LTA page. Obvious sock is obvious. --[[User:Blackmane|Blackmane]] ([[User talk:Blackmane|talk]]) 08:51, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
{{abot}}
:Unless his MO has drastically changed this looks more like a bad [[Joe job]] to me. —[[User:Jéské Couriano|<i style="color: #1E90FF;">A little blue Bori</i>]] [[User talk:Jéské Couriano|<span style="color: #228B22">v^_^v</span>]] <sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/Jéské Couriano|Bori!]]</small></sup> 22:55, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
::Yup, re-tagged. There are several vandals who regularly do grawp stuff, while JA has moved on to other things. -- [[user:zzuuzz|zzuuzz]] <sup>[[user_talk:zzuuzz|(talk)]]</sup> 23:34, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
:::[[WP:BEANS|Without explaining too much]] some of those targets are ones he wouldn't have hit to begin with. —[[User:Jéské Couriano|<i style="color: #1E90FF;">A little blue Bori</i>]] [[User talk:Jéské Couriano|<span style="color: #228B22">v^_^v</span>]] <sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/Jéské Couriano|Bori!]]</small></sup> 19:57, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
::::I should have been a bit more explicit in my post. I wasn't really implying that YoshiFan160 was JA. Merely pointing out that an editor with barely 30 edits knew to find the protection policy and a LTA page. These are very specific parts of WP that newbies generally won't have any knowledge of. Even if they weren't a sock, most of their editing is vandalism. --[[User:Blackmane|Blackmane]] ([[User talk:Blackmane|talk]]) 12:16, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
== Deletion of sourced content ==
There's been a weird series of interactions with {{user|Qwirkle}} on [[Yuri Aleksandrovich Panteleyev]], currently on the main page - [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yuri_Aleksandrovich_Panteleyev&curid=60481077&action=history history here]. He first removed the word raglan with the somewhat hostile but rather meaningless edit summary [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yuri_Aleksandrovich_Panteleyev&type=revision&diff=897749465&oldid=897744001 "WTF!"]. I'd orginally made an error in writing the article, using raglan for collar, rather than the coat as is mentioned in the article. Not knowing if he didn't understand the word 'raglan', or was reasonably objecting to the mistake of raglan collar, I restored raglan this time in its proper place as the type of coat. He reverted, saying [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yuri_Aleksandrovich_Panteleyev&diff=next&oldid=897749925 yes, some of those have raglan sleeves, yup. But there is no such thing, in english, as a “raglan collar”.]. Assuming he'd not checked the revert and thought the 'raglan' had just been reinserted into its previous place, I reverted, pointing out that this wasn't about a raglan collar any more, but the coat. He reverted again claiming [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yuri_Aleksandrovich_Panteleyev&diff=next&oldid=897754373 Yes, that was precisely my intent, that is not, despite the occasional zoolanderoid magazine, a common English term]. When I asked on his talkpage if he was saying that there isn't such a thing as a raglan coat, he replied "Pretty much". Google returns 119,000 hits for "Raglan Coat" - rather too many to pass off as an "occasional zoolanderoid magazine", and whether it was or it wasn't, it is in the Russian source of the article that that's what it is. I'm not sure if he has some objection to the term, doesn't like being reverted, or what. But he is removing sourced content on the grounds that its not a term in use in English, when the evidence suggests that's nonsense. [[User:Spokoyni|Spokoyni]] ([[User talk:Spokoyni|talk]]) 05:32, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
:The Russian material is, not surprisingly, ''in Russian'', and uses an English loanword in a manner which English itself generally does not. There are many forms of coat with raglan sleeves, ranging from windbreakers to trenchcoats. It has no particular meaning aside from a sleeve design, and a search-engine dredge will rapidly confirm that for anyone with any doubts. (The dominant image that comes up on the Russian word appears to be a lady’s sweater, oddly enough. I’m sure the Admiral looked fetching in his.)<p>The objection, in short, is not to properly sourced material, but to a calque translation, which is to say, the work of a wikipedian, not a reliable source. [[User:Qwirkle|Qwirkle]] ([[User talk:Qwirkle|talk]]) 06:00, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
::Raglan in English, Реглан in Russian. Whether he had been wearing a [[Chesterfield coat]], [[Duster (clothing)|Duster]] or [[Ulster coat]], if that was what it says in the source, that's what it should say in the article. Certainly Реглан to Raglan is just a part of [[Wikipedia:Translation]]. As to English not using Raglan in this way, there are plenty of dictionary results happy to define a Raglan, as well as all those google hits. Wiktionary for example has Raglan (n.) "An overcoat with sleeves of this type." The Russian wiktionary as an identical definition for Реглан. If it will help matters I'd be happy to drop the word 'coat' for just 'Raglan', but "Raglan" is more specific than just coat, and there's no justification on removing it, and certainly not because you think its a "occasional zoolanderoid magazine"-term. To deny sources in other languages from wikipedia because they rely on translations by wikipedia editors and thus can't be accepted as reliable is an astounding suggestion to make. [[User:Spokoyni|Spokoyni]] ([[User talk:Spokoyni|talk]]) 06:33, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
:::{{u|Spokoyni}}, this is a garden variety content dispute and you should be aware that neither ANI nor adminstrators in general adjudicate content disputes. Work it out on the article talk page, and if that is not successful, please use the procedures described at [[WP:DR|Dispute resolution]]. [[User:Cullen328|<b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328</sup>]] [[User talk:Cullen328|<span style="color:#00F">''Let's discuss it''</span>]] 07:03, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
:::{{ec}}No. When words are borrowed from other languages, they often do not exactly preserve the original language’s meaning, and the two words can further separate with time. Sometimes meanings freeze in one language but not the other, sometimes both drift, but in different directions. No one who does not realize this is competent to translate. [[User:Qwirkle|Qwirkle]] ([[User talk:Qwirkle|talk]]) 07:03, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
::::My go-to dictionary, Chambers Dictionary (13th Edition) defines raglan as "noun: 1. An overcoat with sleeve in one piece with the shoulder; 2. Any garment made in this style, esp knitted. adjective: 1. (of a sleeve) in one piece with the shoulder 2. (of a garment) having sleeves of this kind." This suggests that raglan on its own refers to a coat or other garment rather than to its sleeve, and if used as a qualifier can refer to either the sleeve itself or the entire garment. So it looks to me as though [[User:Spokoyni|Spokoyni]] is perfectly right, and that [[User:Qwirkle|Qwirkle]] has no legitimate argument, and should certainly not be repeatedly reverting. <span style="font-family: Papyrus">[[User:RolandR|RolandR]] ([[User talk:RolandR|talk]])</span> 17:52, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::So, you also believe that loanwords in other languages, borrowed two centuries back, and used in the context of WWII, must share meanings exactly today. [[WP:CIR]] suggests you should not do any translations, then. [[User:Qwirkle|Qwirkle]] ([[User talk:Qwirkle|talk]]) 18:35, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::Two editors, at least, have provided evidence from reliable sources that something is; you have not provided any evidence that something isn't, instead choosing to make vague references to general tendencies and insult others. You might be aiming [[WP:CIR]] in the wrong direction. --[[User:Calton|Calton]] | [[User talk:Calton|Talk]] 21:19, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::::Nonsense, {{ping|Calton}}. The question at hand is not the current most likely meaning of an English word. The sort of Google-dredge [[User:Spokoyni|Spokoyni]] did, or a simple consultation of an English dictionary as did [[User:RolandR|RolandR]] might occasionally help with that, although even in English that is very tricky with military clothing, whose names tend toward the avant-garde and the archaic. Nope, we are looking for the meaning of a Russian word, and so far nothing has been provided by them but handwaves to Google, and a risible claim that two words with the same spelling, give or take Latin vs. Cyrillic, must be the same, and the same over many years of time. By comparison, look at [http://scjournal.ru/articles/issn_1997-2911_2014_2-2_45.pdf this] around the 5th page of the pdf, page 170 in the original. [[User:Qwirkle|Qwirkle]] ([[User talk:Qwirkle|talk]]) 21:35, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::::Qwirkle has tried to use every excuse imaginable to prevent the term 'Raglan' from being used in the article. From stating that the term doesn't exist in English, to that translations can't be allowed because they are done by wikipedians, and now that Реглан cannot be translated into English at all on the theoretical, [[WP:OR]], and wholly incorrect claim that Raglan might possibly not be the same as Реглан. This despite the fact that English and Russian dictionaries ([https://classes.ru/all-russian/dictionary-foreign-term-11283.htm], [http://feb-web.ru/feb/mas/mas-abc/17/ma369431.htm?cmd=0&istext=1], [https://www.efremova.info/word/reglan.html#.XOHaZ6R7nIU]) define them as the same, and the source used in this article dates from 2010. And I'm not sure who is doing the handwaving with a statement that translations are apparently "very tricky with military clothing, whose names tend toward the avant-garde and the archaic". That is simply more [[WP:OR]], as well as nonsense. This is disruptive editing on the part of Qwirkle. Despite having been given numerous examples showing the meaning of this Russian word by users, they are [[WP:IDIDN'THEARTHAT|choosing to ignore that]], and to remove sourced content. I would argue that Qwirkle's repeated edits to remove the term should be reverted, and that reversion enforced. [[User:Spokoyni|Spokoyni]] ([[User talk:Spokoyni|talk]]) 22:59, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
::::That ship has already sailed; the question now at hand is whether your obvious competency issues warrant a boomerang. You have a scholarly source claiming that the original sense of Реглан in Russian is “military dress uniform”, which, in Soviet service, often used astrakan collars for higher ranks, yet you still seem to be insisting he was wearing a Savile Row overcoat into battle. Good luck with that. [[User:Qwirkle|Qwirkle]] ([[User talk:Qwirkle|talk]]) 23:15, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
{{od}} {{u|Spokoyni}} and {{u|Qwirkle}}, I explained to you yesterday (in every time zone) that this is a garden variety content dispute which is inappropriate to discuss at this noticeboard. Was I insufficiently clear? Why are you continuing to debate the trivial content dispute in ''the wrong place''? [[User:Cullen328|<b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328</sup>]] [[User talk:Cullen328|<span style="color:#00F">''Let's discuss it''</span>]] 06:13, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:The matter of claiming to “source” something ''in another language'' by a cursory glance, in English, at a search engine (or a dictionary) is a competence issue. Someone who can not see the potential problems with that has no business translating things...which appears to be almost everything this particular wikiteur does. Now, I agree that this particular instance is minor, but it is quite likely the tip of the iceberg, given that the filer seems to genuinely believe he can “translate” based on a word’s appearance and etymology. There are whole books written on the [[false friend]] problem, and even a wiki article or three. Yes, there is an issue relevant to ANI here, even if the particular manifestation is small. So use a <small>little, tiny boomerang...</small> [[User:Qwirkle|Qwirkle]] ([[User talk:Qwirkle|talk]]) 14:02, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
*I agree that ANI is not the place to be arguing about this, but I also agree that Qwirkle is right about the substance of the dispute. [[User:Reyk|<b style="color: Maroon;">Reyk</b>]] <sub>[[User talk:Reyk|<b style="color: Blue;">YO!</b>]]</sub> 06:55, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
== 67.61.34.163 ==
{{u5|67.61.34.163}}
Since April 26, the IP has been constantly editing the lead section of [[1824 United States presidential election]]. But, with most their edits largely being unsourced and unexplained, and going against the MoS (specifically [[MOS:LEADLENGTH]] and [[WP:DETAIL]]), I tried to restore the [[Special:PermanentLink/892951535|April 17]] version twice. They suggest that the new introduction of a page that already had insufficient inline citations is fine, even though it's not. They were warned by another user on [[Special:PermanentLink/895851762|May 6]] for making unconstructive edits to the same page. Of all of their contributions, only three of them have explanations, two of which are about the reverts. With that said, I am given the impression that the IP has been making disruptive edits. --[[User:Wow|Wow]] ([[User talk:Wow|talk]]) 06:42, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
:{{u|Wow}}, you have already made a post at [[Talk:1824 United States presidential election]] which is the correct way to seek consensus on this routine content dispute. What sort of action by adminstrators are you asking for? Are you asking for a block of the other editor? If so, please explain why, with diffs. [[User:Cullen328|<b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328</sup>]] [[User talk:Cullen328|<span style="color:#00F">''Let's discuss it''</span>]] 07:30, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
::Well, in that case, I'll just continue the discussion on the other talk page and seek consensus. --[[User:Wow|Wow]] ([[User talk:Wow|talk]]) 07:39, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Cullen328}} So yesterday, I reverted the IP for the third time and told them to review [[WP:BRD]] and seek [[WP:CONSENSUS]] first before implementing their revised lead. Despite bringing up the issues on that talk page, they now have technically reverted for the third time and insist that I have to gain consensus to undo their edits. None of the lead sections of any other U.S. presidential election are formatted in the same way as the IP's. They did suggest that I trim down the lead instead of simply reverting, but I am wary of doing that as most of the page could be unsourced. Otherwise, isn't this a violation of [[MOS:VAR]] and a case of [[WP:NOTHERE]]? --[[User:Wow|Wow]] ([[User talk:Wow|talk]]) 23:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::::{{u|Wow}}, speaking as an ordinary editor and not in my role as an adminstrator, I agree with you that the current lead of this article is excessively long and contains way too much detail. You would be entirely justifiable, in my opinion, to trim the lead down to four concise informative paragraphs. Speaking as an administrator, though, this is not a matter for this noticeboard which does not adjudicate content disputes. Please do not continue to debate the matter here. Discuss it at the article talk page or use other forms of [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]] appropriate for content disputes. [[User:Cullen328|<b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328</sup>]] [[User talk:Cullen328|<span style="color:#00F">''Let's discuss it''</span>]] 02:34, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
== User:Alg01 ==
{{u5|Alg01}}
This editor is having a crystal-clear agenda: removing Morocco from any history-related article. He's not here to [[Wikipedia:NOTHERE|build an encyclopedia]], and these are some examples of his disruptive behavior:
* Removing Morocco/Moroccan from history related articles and spamming pages with edit summaries like, "removed/replaced Morocco" : [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kingdom_of_Tlemcen&diff=prev&oldid=896128217&diffmode=source], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kingdom_of_Tlemcen&diff=prev&oldid=896128910&diffmode=source], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abu_Tashufin_I&diff=prev&oldid=896333774&diffmode=source], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yusuf_ibn_Tashfin&diff=prev&oldid=896568659&diffmode=source], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yusuf_ibn_Tashfin&diff=prev&oldid=896568659&diffmode=source], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hammad_ibn_Buluggin&diff=prev&oldid=897819993&diffmode=source], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Buluggin_ibn_Muhammad&diff=prev&oldid=897825201&diffmode=source], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nasir_ibn_Alnas&diff=prev&oldid=897826401&diffmode=source], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_R%C3%ADo_Salado&diff=prev&oldid=896569097&diffmode=source].
* Adding poorly translated text to articles without changing the smallest thing: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abu_Hammu_I&diff=prev&oldid=897732578&diffmode=source], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abu_Zayyan_I&diff=prev&oldid=897782651&diffmode=source].
The problem here is not just his behavior and edits. It's this pov pushing pattern that was used by other editors like: [[wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bokpasa/Archive|Bokpasa]]. They're having the same behavior and the same anti-moroccan agenda. In 2018, I encountered one of his socks, [[User:Lucas-Recio|Lucas-Recio]]. And I'm having a [[wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive982#user:Lucas-Recio|deja-vu]] -[[User:TheseusHeLl|TheseusHeLl]] ([[User talk:TheseusHeLl|talk]]) 21:37, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Dear , {TheseusHeLl}
I dont know how to respond to these so i'll just edit this real quick and hope someone reads the following :
1/ I replaced "Morocco" with the actual name of the region at that time , it's not a crime that's called being accurate. Morocco is only a recent political entity.
2/ Dynasties that are ethnically not "Moroccan " should not be nationalised by Moroccans , ex: the Marinids. It's only normal to revert your nationalisation of said dynasties.
3/ If I make grammatical mistakes, point them out and correct them rather than crying about it on this board.
4/ I left you a message on you talk page , you never replied so I assumed you had no arguments.
5/ If accurately describing history makes me "anti-Moroccan" then so be it.
<!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Alg01|Alg01]] ([[User talk:Alg01#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Alg01|contribs]]) 21:57, 19 May 2019 (UTC)</small>
:You're not entitled to your opinion. The [[wp:pov|pov]] that "[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Doug_Weller&diff=897872960&oldid=897793368&diffmode=source this country did not exist at the time] " is undoubtly wrong. The majority of academic works are against your pov. -[[User:TheseusHeLl|TheseusHeLl]] ([[User talk:TheseusHeLl|talk]]) 23:13, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
:This is what he said to me in Doug Weller's talk page, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Doug_Weller&diff=prev&oldid=897880789&diffmode=source {{xt|"Not my fault Morocco is historically incapable of founding it's own dynasties , it's reliance on Arabs ( to this day) and it's neighbors in my opinion is the source of your identity crisis."}}]. I don't think this editor is here to [[Wikipedia:NOTHERE|build an encyclopedia]]. -[[User:TheseusHeLl|TheseusHeLl]] ([[User talk:TheseusHeLl|talk]]) 00:35, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:And [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Doug_Weller&diff=prev&oldid=897880789&diffmode=source {{xt|Irnonically , the only authors that seem to support your claims where born in the last 100 years and have an interesting colonial relationship with Morocco...}}]. -[[User:TheseusHeLl|TheseusHeLl]] ([[User talk:TheseusHeLl|talk]]) 00:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::Sounds like a content dispute not a behavior one. [[Special:Contributions/2601:1C0:6D00:845:594:F6CB:1963:ABAC|2601:1C0:6D00:845:594:F6CB:1963:ABAC]] ([[User talk:2601:1C0:6D00:845:594:F6CB:1963:ABAC|talk]]) 04:51, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::I don't think so. He's clearly here to edit in a nationalistic way. This text summarizes his agenda, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Doug_Weller&diff=897880789&oldid=897878354&diffmode=source {{xt|"Not my fault Morocco is historically incapable of founding it's own dynasties , it's reliance on Arabs ( to this day) and it's neighbors in my opinion is the source of your identity crisis. I don't need to put "Algerian " infront of the Zirids or any Algerian dynasty ...because they originate within my country. Can you say the same ? Nope. Without biased historians , what is Morocco's history do tell me?"}}] -[[User:TheseusHeLl|TheseusHeLl]] ([[User talk:TheseusHeLl|talk]]) 05:27, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
: I just submitted an SPI request [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Bokpasa|here]] [[User:Rockstone35|<span style="color:#DF0101"><b>Rockstone</b></span>]][[User talk:Rockstone35|<span style="color:black"><b><small>talk to me!</small></b></span>]] 18:18, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
== Lame legal threat from an obvious sock ==
{{atop
| status =
| result = Blocked for 2 weeks by {{u|Black Kite}}. [[User:SemiHypercube|<b style="color:#090">Semi</b>]][[User talk:SemiHypercube|<i style="color:#099">Hyper</i>]][[Special:Contributions/SemiHypercube|<u style="color:#009">cube</u>]] 15:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC) {{nac}}
}}
{{user|86.138.110.223}} is an obvious sock of {{U|KaranSharma0445}} that's objecting to some of their edits being reverted. Several of their edit summaries get into the personal attack territory (complaining about my english when using text shortcuts?!?). They've just left this post [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:86.138.110.223&diff=prev&oldid=897872015] on their talk page that crosses the line though. Please review and block if appropriate. Thank you. <b>[[User:Ravensfire|<span style="color: darkred;">Ravensfire</span>]]</b> ([[User talk:Ravensfire|talk]]) 22:17, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
* I've blocked the IP, but only for 2 weeks as it's a dynamic IP from a very big ISP (which I use myself, and I know my IP changes regularly). You may be better off asking for semi-protection for any articles that are regularly being disrupted. [[User_talk:Black Kite|Black Kite (talk)]] 22:25, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
::Thanks. I've done some, and will probably be more aggressive. Ponyo gets a lot of their socks normally and they normally don't get this aggressive when challenged, must be feeling frustrated. <b>[[User:Ravensfire|<span style="color: darkred;">Ravensfire</span>]]</b> ([[User talk:Ravensfire|talk]]) 22:31, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
:::<small>I love the smell of angry socks in the morning [[User:Nosebagbear|Nosebagbear]] ([[User talk:Nosebagbear|talk]]) </small>
{{abot}}
== Paid editing in Sandra Piesik ==
I recently nominated an article [[Dr Sandra Piesik]] for CSD, it was created by an account named [[User:Sandraizabela5]], apparently that is the name of the person in the article as well. Now, I observed on the article's talk page another user [[User:Damiandp]] talking very formally about how wikipedia is a wonderful platform and that they belong to the "Sandra Piesik Wiki team" and "Sandra Piesik Admin Team". Although the person is question has hints of notability(fellow of "[[Royal Geographical Society]] with IBG", a page tagged as promotional). I suspect a case of UPE and possible sockpuppetry, as the user damian requested unblocking of the sandra piesik account, which might have happened earlier.
::Also found [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=&user=&page=+Sandra+Piesik&wpdate=&tagfilter=] [[User:Daiyusha|Daiyusha]] ([[User talk:Daiyusha|talk]]) 08:07, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:The page had been repeatedly created and deleted before at [[Sandra Piesik]], which I then salted. It had been deleted as a copyright violation, and the user had said "I will rewrite the content of the entry to version complies with the regulations". Instead, they posted another copyvio at [[Dr Sandra Piesik]], which I deleted as well. I recommend an indef block for both users for repeated copyright violations + self-promotion (the user claims to be "Sandra Piesik Admin Team"). [[User:Fram|Fram]] ([[User talk:Fram|talk]]) 09:27, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:: I agree this is a NOTHERE case, and probably an indef block is in order, but they did not edit since the last warning, and were not notified of this discussion (which I am going to do now). I am inclined to wait for their next edit.--[[User:Ymblanter|Ymblanter]] ([[User talk:Ymblanter|talk]]) 09:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Dear Wiki Admin,<br>Thank you for your comments. Text will be re-written as suggested.<br>It may take some time please bear with us.<br>Best wishes. [[User:Sandraizabela5|Sandraizabela5]] ([[User talk:Sandraizabela5|talk]]) 11:34, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::::You said this [[User_talk:Fram#Sandra_Piesik_-_copyright_infringement|on 9 May]] and again on 14 May. But you are still violating copyright. What is going to change? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:17, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::: The talk page of the now deleted [[Dr Sandra Piesik]] page has some interesting comments by the damien user, who contested the deletion of the page. Those who can access it, please have a look. [[User:Daiyusha|Daiyusha]] ([[User talk:Daiyusha|talk]]) 12:38, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::I have blocked [[User:Damiandp]] and have provided unblock conditions. [[User:Boing! said Zebedee|Boing! said Zebedee]] ([[User talk:Boing! said Zebedee|talk]]) 19:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
== User A H Butt (again) ==
{{user|A H Butt}}
The ink has not dried on [[#User A H Butt|the previous report]], and this user still ignores the input from the community, and the warning given by [[User:DrKay|DrKay]].
Diffs:
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Archibald_Wavell,_1st_Earl_Wavell&diff=prev&oldid=897929844 Archibald Wavell, 1st Earl Wavell]
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Margaret_Thatcher&diff=897876243&oldid=895844185 Margaret Thatcher]
A short block may be necessary to catch their attention. User is notified again. [[User:HandsomeFella|HandsomeFella]] ([[User talk:HandsomeFella|talk]]) 11:15, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:I am willing to block. A short block is unlikely to be successful as they will just wait it out. (They have never posted on a talk page since creating their account in February.) So it will be indefinite until they respond to concerns on their talk page. Is everyone okay with this? — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 12:12, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:I would support such a block, on the understanding that it would force the user to engage with the previously-expressed concerns. [[User:Mackensen|Mackensen]] [[User_talk:Mackensen|(talk)]] 13:20, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::Blocked, until they resolve to concerns on their talk page — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 15:56, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
== Abuse of admin privileges by [[User:Liz]] ==
{{atop|Everyone seems to agree that this was an honest mistake made worse at least in part due to failure to communicate. The issue with the category page has been resolved. [[User:Ivanvector|Ivanvector]] (<sup>[[User talk:Ivanvector|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Ivanvector|Edits]]</sub>) 15:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)}}
[[User:Liz]] did not notify page creator of her proposed deletion, ignored the [[Category talk:Indonesia rail transport color templates|talk page explanation]] contesting the speedy deletion, and then — in what has the appearance of [[WP:COI]] in that the same person acted as both judge and jury — deleted her own nomination. (See {{url|1=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=delete&user=Liz&page=Category%3AIndonesia+rail+transport+color+templates|2=Deletion log}} and {{url|1=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Indonesia_rail_transport_color_templates&action=history|2=Page history}}.) [[User:Useddenim|Useddenim]] ([[User talk:Useddenim|talk]]) 12:52, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:{{replyto|Useddenim}} There is no notification requirement for [[WP:CSD|speedy deletions]](or [[WP:PROD|proposed deletions]], which are different). Users are expected to monitor the pages they are interested in knowing about. I'm not sure about any rule for carrying out one's own speedy deletion suggestion, but if you feel the deletion was incorrect, you can go to [[WP:DRV|Deletion Review]]. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 12:57, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:: The page has been recreated, but the category is still empty (despite the statement on the talk page that it is not empty).--[[User:Ymblanter|Ymblanter]] ([[User talk:Ymblanter|talk]]) 13:18, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::: Something is fishy here, the template {{tl|Jakarta color}} is clearly tagged with this category but it is not ''populating'' the category. Investigating. [[User:Ivanvector|Ivanvector]] (<sup>[[User talk:Ivanvector|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Ivanvector|Edits]]</sub>) 13:20, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:There's certainly nothing untoward about an administrator deleting an empty category after a week, even if they're the one who tagged it. There's no value judgement in that, it's purely maintenance. I would note that even now [[:Category:Indonesia rail transport color templates]] appears as empty, despite [[:Template:Jakarta color]] being categorized in that category. I've seen that behavior with template documentation before and it feels like a bug. Maybe this has been reported before. I'll decline the speedy on those grounds, but you should consider apologizing to {{u|Liz}}. [[User:Mackensen|Mackensen]] [[User_talk:Mackensen|(talk)]] 13:17, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:This is hardly "abuse of admin privileges". The category appeared to be empty despite your insistence that it is not, and empty categories get deleted. Please don't recreate deleted pages because you disagree with the method of deletion; the proper process of challenging a deletion starts with discussing with the deleting administrator. Did you attempt to discuss this with Liz before posting here? [[User:Ivanvector|Ivanvector]] (<sup>[[User talk:Ivanvector|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Ivanvector|Edits]]</sub>) 13:22, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::As both {{U|Ivanvector}} and {{U|Mackensen}} noted, there ''is'' a member of the category – which was clearly stated on the talk page – that is not populating the page. To ignore a valid deletion contestion is at the very least lazy editing. There's no evidence either that {{u|Liz}} made any attempt to discuss this with me before deleting.
::{{re|Ymblanter}} I didn't say that the category wasn't empty, I said there was a page that was a member of it. Please do not twist my words. [[User:Useddenim|Useddenim]] ([[User talk:Useddenim|talk]]) 13:43, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Ten times out of ten, if a category appears to be empty and it was tagged for deletion for that reason, it's going to be deleted. I probably would have done the same thing, without looking at the talk page. [[User:Mackensen|Mackensen]] [[User_talk:Mackensen|(talk)]] 13:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::{{re|Mackensen}} Then what's the point of contesting a deletion? [[User:Useddenim|Useddenim]] ([[User talk:Useddenim|talk]]) 14:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::::Since [[WP:CSD]] advises admins to check the talk page before deletion, that argument is pretty weak. However, I note that Useddenim has not contacted Liz about that deletion on her talk page before starting this discussion. That probably would have cleared up the mistake without having this discussion at all. Regards [[User:SoWhy|<span style="color:#7A2F2F;font-variant:small-caps">So</span>]][[User talk:SoWhy|<span style="color:#474F84;font-variant:small-caps">Why</span>]] 14:01, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::{{yo|Useddenim}} you should withdraw this. The category was populated improperly and appeared to be empty when Liz deleted it. It still appeared to be empty when you recreated it, so Liz tagged it as empty again for someone else to look at. She did not "delete her own nomination": administrators are empowered to delete pages without nomination or discussion [[WP:CSD|under certain circumstances]], of which [[WP:C1|empty categories]] is one. There was no misconduct here. Mistakes were made, and have now been corrected. Remember that [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] is a policy. [[User:Ivanvector|Ivanvector]] (<sup>[[User talk:Ivanvector|Talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/Ivanvector|Edits]]</sub>) 14:08, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::Thank you for correcting the problem. WHat exactly was the fix so that I can take care of it myself if it happens again. Also, [[WP:AGF]] works both ways; when an experienced editor creates a new cat within an existing hierarchy it's likely for a legitimate reason. [[User:Useddenim|Useddenim]] ([[User talk:Useddenim|talk]]) 14:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::::The category was listed on the documentation page, but not on the template itself. {{diff|Template:Jakarta color|897961674|895951886|Here it was added}} — [[User:Diannaa|Diannaa]] <span style="color:red">🍁</span> ([[User talk:Diannaa|talk]]) 15:07, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::::If admins delete something that shouldn't have and especially if there was an underlying problem when they did, 9 out of 10 times they will revert themselves. As everyone here has already said, it's as simple as talking to the deleting admin. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 15:21, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
{{abot}}
I'm sorry to just be visiting this complaint now but I've reduced my hours on Wikipedia to nights. If you have any complaints about my actions (deletion, blocks, whatever), just come and talk to me. I don't bite and I'm usually pretty accommodating as long as your request doesn't go against Wikipedia's rules and policies. I'm not rigid about my decisions. As for categories, I'm not sure what is up with Twinkle as I have the "Notify creator" box checked but it seems to rarely follow through with that with CSD C1s (although it does for other CSD options). I will have to inquire about that.
But, you see, the thing about empty categories is that as long as it hasn't been deleted through [[WP:CFD|CFD]], categories can be easily recreated if they are found to be useful and fit into Wikipedia's categorization system. So, create some color templates and [[:Category:Indonesia rail transport color templates]] (or some version of that category) can be utilized. Thanks for everyone who chimed in while I was off-line. I'm sorry to post this after the case has been closed but I thought [[User:Useddenim|Useddenim]] might want to hear from me. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 01:31, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:I see that [[:Category:Indonesia rail transport color templates]] has been recreated by [[User:Mackensen|Mackensen]] and is now no longer empty! Everyone okay, now? Okay, great. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 01:45, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
== [[User:Airline7375]] on [[Thomas Cook Group]] articles ==
This issue has languished at [[WP:COI/N]] for several weeks without action (see [[Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Thomas_Cook_Group]]) so I am bringing it to wider attention here. [[User:Airline7375]] is a [[WP:SPA|single purpose account]] with regards to [[Thomas Cook Group]] and its many related articles. Some of their edits are adding unsourced promotional material [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Cook_Group&diff=893665358&oldid=893656688] and some are unsourced updates of company structure and airline fleets. They refuse to engage on their talk page and have continued to edit even after direct questions about their conflict of interest or [[WP:PAID]] status. I believe they are an undeclared paid editor based on their edits. [[User:Shoy|shoy]] <small>([[User talk:Shoy|reactions]])</small> 15:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
== User acts to [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest]] ==
This user [[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] acts to [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest]].
Some of his COI edits:
*One of his statements says: „Kurdish and Kurmanji are not the same. One is a language, the other is a dialect.“[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yazidis&diff=897880980]
*and his other statement says: „Kurmanji means Kurdish in Kurdish“.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurmanji&diff=888496743]
*another statement from him says: „Kurmanji is a synonym for Kurdish.“[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurmanjis&diff=890282823]
*Other COI edits from him says: „This page is about Kurmanji Kurds not Kurds in general“[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurmanjis&diff=897950213]
*and also: „Most of what this page has is already mentioned in Kurds.“[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurmanjis&diff=890363013]
*another COI edit from him claims: „Hüseyin Aygün is a politician not an author“[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zaza_literature&diff=897989034]
but the Wikipedia page of [[Hüseyin Aygün]] says clearly: „Aygün is the writer of a number of books, mainly on the Dersim massacre, including the titles Dersim 1938 ve Zorlu İskan ("Dersim 1938 and the Forced Resettlement"), 0.0.1938 Resmiyet ve Hakikat ("0.0.1938 Formality and Reality"), Dersim 1938 ve Hacı Hıdır Ataç’ın Defteri ("Dersim 1938 and the Notebook of Hacı Hıdır Ataç"), Fişlemenin Kısa Tarihi ("The Brief History of Tagging") and his book in Zazaki language, Eve tarixe ho teri Amaene.“ I also searched Google Books and quickly saw that Hüseyin Aygün is also an author.[https://www.google.com/search?q=H%C3%BCseyin+Ayg%C3%BCn&source=lnms&tbm=bks&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjjxrvG3KriAhVDJ1AKHSbnBHIQ_AUIFCgB&biw=679&bih=922&dpr=2] [[Special:Contributions/62.26.157.20|62.26.157.20]] ([[User talk:62.26.157.20|talk]]) 18:36, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:"Conflict of interest (COI) editing involves contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships." What you are talking about is a content dispute. [[Special:Contributions/2001:4898:80E8:3:EA98:3A2A:1A94:EB53|2001:4898:80E8:3:EA98:3A2A:1A94:EB53]] ([[User talk:2001:4898:80E8:3:EA98:3A2A:1A94:EB53|talk]]) 18:39, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::According to his Wikipedia page he is Kurdish. So he has a personal connection to these articles that deal with Kurdish matters. This is also a relationship according to [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest|COI]] who says: „...and other relationships“. [[Special:Contributions/62.26.157.20|62.26.157.20]] ([[User talk:62.26.157.20|talk]]) 18:46, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::{{Non-admin comment}}By that logic, I couldn't edit any page on Wikipedia dealing with something made in the United States. Now, if the subject were (for example) an author of a book about Kurdistan or the Kurdish people, then that could be a COI if he were citing himself. But this is just a content dispute, or at worst [[WP:POV|POV-pushing]]. Recommend engaging the user on his talk page and closing this. (Oh, and for future reference, there's a page specifically for COI discussions - [[WP:COIN]]) [[User:Creffett|creffett]] ([[User talk:Creffett|talk]]) 18:58, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::::If the IP account (who I suspect to be the same user who got blocked for sockpuppetry, racism and vandalism) believes that the Zaza literature page is worth saving, then go ahead and add reliable information. Most of the oeuvres you mentioned by Hüseyin Aygün are in Turkish, while "Eve Tarixe Ho Teri Amaene" is a history book. If you look at [[Kurdish literature]] or [[French literature]], there's a clear focus on fiction. (Iranicaonline clearly states that is almost non-existing in Zaza[http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kurdish-written-literature]). --[[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] ([[User talk:Ahmedo Semsurî|talk]]) 19:17, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::This is fourth of fifth time since late March that this user involves me on this noticeboard. And everytime I told him to use the talkpage, instead of pushing for his POV. --[[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] ([[User talk:Ahmedo Semsurî|talk]]) 19:20, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::Various admins have also involved themselves and reverted his changes, but he doesn't get it. --[[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] ([[User talk:Ahmedo Semsurî|talk]]) 19:21, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
=== My replies ===
–''One of his statements says: „Kurdish and Kurmanji are not the same. One is a language, the other is a dialect.“[54]''
*Kurdish is a language constituted of three dialects, whereas Kurmanji is the largest of these. Now, this is not disputed by anyone except you.
–'''and his other statement says: „Kurmanji means Kurdish in Kurdish“.[55]''
*As a Kurdish speaker, I can tell you this (and I've given you many academic sources). The word ''Kurmanji'' means Kurdish. So not only are they synonyms, but the largest Kurdish dialect is called... Kurdish(!)
–''another statement from him says: „Kurmanji is a synonym for Kurdish.“[56]''
*Kurmanji is a Kurdish dialect and Kurmanji means Kurdish.
–''Other COI edits from him says: „This page is about Kurmanji Kurds not Kurds in general“[57]''
*What you added was irrelevant. The [[Kurmanjis]] article is about Kurmanjis not all [[Kurds]].
–''and also: „Most of what this page has is already mentioned in Kurds.“[58]''
*No reason to have one scarce article that doesn't have any unique information. That's why I merged the [[Kurmanjis]] (since reverted) to [[Kurds]]
–''another COI edit from him claims: „Hüseyin Aygün is a politician not an author“[59]''
*He doesn't write fiction (if you can find any, you can add him to the [[Zaza literature]].)
--[[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] ([[User talk:Ahmedo Semsurî|talk]]) 19:29, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:You don't really need to reply anymore. The onus is on the ip editor to post something, and since this is very clearly not a COI issue, it'll probably be closed as "this is a content dispute." [[Special:Contributions/2001:4898:80E8:3:EA98:3A2A:1A94:EB53|2001:4898:80E8:3:EA98:3A2A:1A94:EB53]] ([[User talk:2001:4898:80E8:3:EA98:3A2A:1A94:EB53|talk]]) 19:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::{{ping|Ahmedo Semsurî}}, I think you're in the clear on this one, you don't need to defend every single accusation. At this point, its fairly clear that a user is just being disruptive and repeatedly reporting you because they aren't getting their way. Again, I see no COI here, and actually think its good that a Kurdish editor is writing about Kurdish topics. Its clearly an undercovered area on WP that needs clear and interested heads. Keep your head up, and dont let the troublesome IPs drag you into the mud. And for the reporting IP, perhaps a warning about being disruptive. [[User:CaptainEek|<span style="color:#6a1f7f">'''Captain Eek'''</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:CaptainEek|<span style="font-size:82%"><span style="color:#a479e5">''Edits Ho Cap'n!''</span></span>]]</sup>[[Special:Contributions/CaptainEek|⚓]] 06:06, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
== Proposing an IBAN ==
Hi. I want to propose an IBAN between me and [[User:Toa Nidhiki05]]. They are harassing and accusing me of violationg WP:CIVIL ([[Talk:Game of Thrones (season 8)#Isn't the petition kind of a big deal?|and they are not aware of that they violated it]]), when I finally tried to stop replying to them, they began to attend other pages that I'm editing, reverting my edits or [[Talk:Life Is Strange 2#Sourcing|taking sides against me]] with Phillis Minaj, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/PhillisMinaj who is a new editor and called me/my edit summaries snarky and obnoxious]. I'm really tired of this nonsense, and I would like to have an interaction ban with them. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?page=User%3AToa_Nidhiki05&type=block They have also been blocked from editing 4 times already.] [[User talk:Sebastian James|Sebastian James <span style="color:red"><small style="font-size:70%;">what's the T?</small></span>]] 18:51, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
: {{re|Toa Nidhiki05}} Would you be fine with a voluntary enforceable two-way IBAN? --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 19:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:: Respectfully, no, I would not at the moment. He seems to be proposing this primarily to remove me from conflicts he is involved in rather than out of some actual problem. I am seriously concerned with his lack of civility and his false and ridiculous attack on me. This is the crux of my issue with him at the moment. '''[[User:Toa Nidhiki05|<i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Toa</i>]] [[User talk:Toa Nidhiki05|<i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Nidhiki05</i>]]''' 19:06, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:{{edit conflict}}The user requesting this, Sebastian James, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Game_of_Thrones_%28season_8%29&type=revision&diff=897941548&oldid=897941301 randomly insulted me in an edit summary yesterday] (having never interacted with him before) as well as in an [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sebastian_James&diff=prev&oldid=897953069 edit summary when I cautioned him against incivility]. I expressed my bewilderment with this on the [[Talk:Game_of_Thrones_(season_8)%23Isn't_the_petition_kind_of_a_big_deal?|talk page]], where he accused me of being a know-it-all and then informed me he never wanted me to talk to him again; this is not surprising given his talk page is entirely blank, primarily it seems due to a history of cautions and warnings from other editors, and unsurprisingly he’s [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive984#Sebastian_James_(talk) previously been warned] against incivility by AN/I in the past. I’ve since gone to other pages where he has had belligerent behavior and commented or reverted, which the user has taken as a personal attack and harassment against himself. It’s worth noting that, on pages like [[Life is Strange 2]] and [[My Days of Mercy]], most other editors have not taken his stance; he’s also currently edit warring on My Days of Mercy, where another editor and myself have both reverted him.
:As for my blocks, anyone can look at them and see the vast majority were in 2010 and 2011. For reference, I was 16 or 17 then, and those are nearly a decade ago. I did lose my cool a few months ago, but I’m not sure what it has to do with anything here. I try to avoid these circumstances in general, but I don’t believe I’ve ever had any instance of harassment or incivility leveled against me, at least not that I can remember.
:It seems to me the more adequate solution is to encourage Sebastian James to be more open to input from other users, to be civil in his remarks rather than insulting, to express less ownership of pages, and to not treat interactions on his talk page as a uniform negative. I know it’s his right to blank his talk page, but it’s incredibly confusing, and [[talk:Life_Is_Strange_2%23Sourcing|other editors]] have expressed a similar concern. '''[[User:Toa Nidhiki05|<i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Toa</i>]] [[User talk:Toa Nidhiki05|<i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Nidhiki05</i>]]''' 19:05, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Considering that Sebastian has mentioned me too, I'd like to point out that it seems that even after bringing this up here he continues to make uncivil comments i.e. calling other users toxic on [[Talk:My Days of Mercy]]; previous to this he has a long history of poor interaction with other editors as can be found in the history of his talk page. Sebastian has also been warned to be more careful in being civil towards other editors at ANI before.
:::Not to mention he's causing problems on [[Talk:Life is Strange 2]] where he clearly accepts that edits are acceptable but seems to want to argue and make changes to ensure he 'doesn't lose'. The combative nature of his editing doesn't seem to be in the spirit of improving the encyclopedia, rather that he's looking to score points. '''Phillis'''''Minaj'' 19:26, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::::Your latest block was this March and now you have reverted the ANI notification because it was "frivolous". Your edit on [[My Days of Mercy]] is incorrect, as I have explained before in the edit summary and more detailed in the talk page, and then you stated WP:BRD which clearly contradicts what you wrote. That "other editor (not editors, you should stop saying other editors when you and the new editor are the only ones that allege an insult from me) have expressed a similar concern" created their account today and is acting like you. I'm not sure why a failed attempt to report me with one warning about civility has to do with anything here too if we accept your comments. I think that this editor is toxic and is not eligible for collaboration, if he doesn't want IBAN then I suggest another block.
::::I am not accepting your edits for now because of the source you presented, do not accuse me again for {{tq|ensure he 'doesn't lose'}}. You are not even accepting that you have been warned for violating 3RR on the day you created this account, which might be [[WP:SOCK]], now I'm "scoring points"? [[User talk:Sebastian James|Sebastian James <span style="color:red"><small style="font-size:70%;">what's the T?</small></span>]] 19:32, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::That's a serious allegation. I am most definitely not a sockpuppet, and haven't edited Wikipedia for many years but decided to have another go today. If you want to allege that I was engaged in an edit war then you need to understand that it takes two to tango, and the consensus on the article's talk page very much agrees with my edits; the same talk page you were unwilling to involve yourself in the discussion on, rather stating that your edit summarys were good enough discourse. A quick peruse through your history shows that these same issues seem to crop up with many users about your uncivility. '''Phillis'''''Minaj'' 19:37, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:I just wrote that you might be sockpuppet since the day you created your article you get your first and other warnings and involved in disputes more than one, and "I am most definitely not a sockpuppet" is not enough. The consensus haven't been reached yet, how can it "agrees with your edits"? My talk page history consists three-revert rule, not using edit summary and unconstructive editing warnings, which most of them were not even true/correct. None of them says uncivility, why are you even continuing to change what we already able to see? [[User talk:Sebastian James|Sebastian James <span style="color:red"><small style="font-size:70%;">what's the T?</small></span>]] 19:48, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::First and other warnings? Other than the edit war that you started with me I'm not sure what you're talking about? If that's not good enough I suggest you start an official investigation into whether I'm a sockpuppet of Toa or not rather than just making wild accusations. All the other contributors on that talk page, and the [[WP:VG/S]] state that the source is reliable, you're the only editor with the issue. '''Phillis'''''Minaj'' 19:54, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
:I’m just going to respond to what I think is directed at me:
:1) I reverted your notification from my talk page, yes. I clearly find this report to be frivolous, and I am not required to keep it on my page. This is entirely permitted under the rules.
:2) I am not sure why you are calling me toxic. My editing history here is clearly one of collaboration. I have done substantial work in promoting good and featured articles, which require a substantial deal of collaboration with other editors. It’s one of the parts of editing I like most.
:3) What exactly do you want me blocked for? I haven’t done anything wrong or violated any policies. You keep pointing to a block I had in March and yes, I will admit, I lost my cool there. I can’t explain it, but I’m more than happy to accept I was in the wrong.
:4) I have no clue who Phillis Minaj is. I clearly agree with him that there are some issues with your editing, but I don’t have any connection with this user. You’re more than welcome to start an investigation and run checkuser if you want, but I think it’s a bit paranoid to think users who disagree with you must all be socks. '''[[User:Toa Nidhiki05|<i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Toa</i>]] [[User talk:Toa Nidhiki05|<i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Nidhiki05</i>]]''' 19:41, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
::Yeah, I am the only one for now, Kleuske didn't write "the complaint is that the article is based on a Spotify account, which generally isn’t a reliable source. Edit warring over maintenance templates isn’t the way to go."
::Both of you, at least, assume or write what I didn't, such as "it’s a bit paranoid to think users who disagree with you must all be socks." Did I write anything like that? You revert edits without an instant explanation, then you make a big deal out of them on the talk pages and then you accuse me falsely... You are the one who keeps showing my ANI issue a year ago which was a failed attempt to report and that editor and I both had a warning. It is not a problem for me, neither is my talk page history, which you keep saying that I got warnings because of my uncivility. Please at least read edit summaries of the warnings. If you did, we wouldn't even be here. And I suggested a block because I really think that you and Phillis are gonna keep confronting and reverting my edits with bizarre explanations. That's all for me today. [[User talk:Sebastian James|Sebastian James <span style="color:red"><small style="font-size:70%;">what's the T?</small></span>]] 20:03, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Note: I have blocked both Sebastian James and Phillis Minaj for 24 hours for 3RR violation on [[Life Is Strange 2]] — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 20:54, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
== Misusing of the sock puppetry template ==
Hello dear community, I do not know if I'm right here regarding the following problem. The user [[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] misuses the template for sock puppetry and reports each IP address in the same article in which he is also involved. I do not know what relationship he has with Jahmalm, but this is clearly going too far. Wikipedia is a place for all people even if they do not have an account and edit as an IP. I also find his behavior a bit paranoid. He makes the appearance as if the articles belong to him and no other IP is allowed to work there. Maybe {{rpa}}. [[Special:Contributions/81.37.160.164|81.37.160.164]] ([[User talk:81.37.160.164|talk]]) 01:22, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:You are welcome to edit Wikipedia, but stop pushing for your POV like your edit here[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurmanji&diff=prev&oldid=897969157]. Don't [[Wikipedia:Cherrypicking|Cherrypick]] and don't remove academically sourced information just because it doesn't fit you.
:This issue has already been discussed on the talk page [[Talk:Kurmanji]] but also on this noticeboard yesterday, where I've responded to your edit. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#User_acts_to_Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest] --[[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] ([[User talk:Ahmedo Semsurî|talk]]) 01:36, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::That's no reason to report every IP and accuse them of sock behavior and misuse the sock puppetry template. [[Special:Contributions/81.37.160.164|81.37.160.164]] ([[User talk:81.37.160.164|talk]]) 01:43, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Why does it bother you that I use a legitimate template when I have my concerns? Concentrate on how you can add reliable information on Wikipedia instead of focusing on removing information you disagree with for whatever reasons. --[[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] ([[User talk:Ahmedo Semsurî|talk]]) 01:46, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::::Let's see. Two IPs edit [[Kurmanji]] in the same month, both with edits to other topics, both making similar edits—and similar edits to the alleged master account. I certainly think the sockpuppetry template was applied in good faith. —'''[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred|talk]]) 01:51, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
You use this template for every IP that works in an article that you are involved in. This is misusing and suspicious. [[Special:Contributions/81.37.160.164|81.37.160.164]] ([[User talk:81.37.160.164|talk]]) 01:53, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:I add the template to every IP that uses the same arguments and references as Jahmalm, removes the same type of info as Jahmalm and always end up with personal attacks like that Jahmalm account did. He also liked using this noticeboard. --[[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] ([[User talk:Ahmedo Semsurî|talk]]) 02:00, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::I think you have misused the template too many times and reported and accused many innocent IP‘s like me. This must come to an end and the template should only be used in the clear case. I've done just one edit and you have reported me right away and accused me of something I'm not. [[Special:Contributions/81.37.160.164|81.37.160.164]] ([[User talk:81.37.160.164|talk]]) 02:13, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Hello, [[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]]. Generally, tagging user pages as sockpuppets is left to Checkusers, SPI clerks and admins who patrol SPI. Please do not tag IP accounts you are suspicious of. It's better to file a report at SPI or discuss individual cases with any of our friendly checkusers. You might have your suspicions and be acting in good faith but it is better to consult a CUer or file a formal SPI complaint than act on your hunches. If you have good evidence, it is likely that a CUer will agree with you and if you don't, it's not fair for the IPs who are often dynamic and may be used by any number of people. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 04:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::::Thank you for your answer. He accuses me of sock puppetry, although as an IP I only made a single edit in an article which he is also involved. In this comment ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurmanji&diff=897973778]) he accuses me of being something I am not. Then he reported me here ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=897973846]). And last but not least, he even goes so far as to request for semi-protection ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&diff=897975479]) so that IPs can no longer work in "his" article. Currently the article is protected and he succeeded with his strategic behavior. These tactics are absolutely unfair and so Wikipedia should not work. [[Special:Contributions/81.37.160.164|81.37.160.164]] ([[User talk:81.37.160.164|talk]]) 11:57, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::I encourage you to make a user and thereby bypass the protection. --[[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] ([[User talk:Ahmedo Semsurî|talk]]) 13:46, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::For this reason you report me right away and accuse me of being something I am not and you are misusing the template. [[Special:Contributions/81.37.160.164|81.37.160.164]] ([[User talk:81.37.160.164|talk]]) 14:36, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:{{u|Ahmedo Semsurî}}, please don't place tags on IP addresses, particularly not a tag that places the IP in the "confirmed sockpuppet" category. IP addresses should only be tagged if they are [[Static IP|static]] and have been abused over a significant period of time. —[[User:DoRD|DoRD]] ([[User talk:DoRD|talk]]) 17:52, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
== Closed Afd by his own ==
{{u|Alexxeos}} (article creater) closed Afd as '''speedy keep''' by his own! check it https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sai_Ye_Htet_Kaung&oldid=898016618 or [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sai Ye Htet Kaung]]. {{u|Praxidicae}} already warning on Alexxeos's [[User talk:Alexxeos|talk]] page. [[User:MyanmarBBQ|MyanmarBBQ]] ([[User talk:MyanmarBBQ|talk]]) 03:36, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:Yes, that is not acceptable. They are an inexperienced editor, however. Perhaps something got lost in translation? [[User:El_C|El_C]] 03:43, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Yep i closed it. Sorry if i did something wrong. He want to delete with wp:musicbio and it is not wp:musicbio.Thanks.
[[User:Alexxeos|Alexxeos]] ([[User talk:Alexxeos|talk]]) 03:55, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:Actually, it does appear to fall under [[Wikipedia:Notability (music)|musicbio]]. I'm not sure why you would argue otherwise. [[User:El_C|El_C]] 03:58, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::This subject is clearly fails [[WP:MUSICBIO]], doesn't meet [[WP:GNG]]. Article creater removed Afd template again...again...! [[User:MyanmarBBQ|MyanmarBBQ]] ([[User talk:MyanmarBBQ|talk]]) 04:04, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Yes, [[WP:EW|edit warring]] over the removal of the tag was definitely a lapse in judgment. [[User:El_C|El_C]] 04:10, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
It was caterogized under BLP as living person.I know Music is not notability but as a living person.Sorry For My English.Thanks
[[User:Alexxeos|Alexxeos]] ([[User talk:Alexxeos|talk]]) 04:19, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:Sorry, but that is not so. [[User:El_C|El_C]] 04:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Well it is well sourced and cite and WP: with Neutral point of view (NPOV) Verifiability (V) and No original research (NOR) if it's not still even approve as living person it's ok and I am not wasting my time here for argument.Sorry for Take your time .Thanks.
[[User:Alexxeos|Alexxeos]] ([[User talk:Alexxeos|talk]]) 04:36, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
I think someone should probably enquire as to whether Alexxeos is familiar with [[WP:COI]] policy. His user page (which consists in its entirety of 'We Are the Waste', the name of the subject of the AFD's band) might well lead one to suspect that he isn't. [[Special:Contributions/86.133.149.185|86.133.149.185]] ([[User talk:86.133.149.185|talk]]) 05:40, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:I've left them a note about that too — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 07:33, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
I have blocked Alexxeos 24 hours for persistently removing AfD templates for articles which are still under discussion — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 07:25, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
I note an almost perfect model of a SPA.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 08:13, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
*{{nacc}} Not sure it was related to [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/楊過007]] or not. [[User:Matthew hk on public computer|Matthew hk on public computer]] ([[User talk:Matthew hk on public computer|talk]]) 09:06, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
== 108.252.133.42 ==
[[File:Ambox notice.svg|link=|25px|alt=Information icon]] There is currently a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents]] regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. <!--Template:ANI-notice-->
{{u|108.252.133.42}} has repeatedly added incorrect information with lack of sources to pages, check the IP's edit history for proof. Who supports this address being banned? --[[User:Kyle Peake|Kyle Peake]] ([[User talk:Kyle Peake|talk]]) 10:51, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:No-one; they haven't edited under that IP for two days. [[User:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:black">'''——'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:black">''SerialNumber''</span>]][[User talk:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:#8B0000">54129</span>]] 11:05, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::{{u|Serial Number 54129}} But they are still not IP banned and may just be busy right now, so with the history they do deserve a ban I believe. Understand now? --[[User:Kyle Peake|Kyle Peake]] ([[User talk:Kyle Peake|talk]]) 13:07, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Quite. In the meantime, [[special:diff/898084573|this]] was a wholly unnecessary warning, since the IP hadn't edited that article [[Special:Diff/897724560|for three days]]. Incidentally, as it says at the top of your editing window on this page, {{red|When you start a discussion about an editor, you must notify them on their user talk page}}; you did not do so. I [[special:diff/898097782|did]], but in your name, so as not to be thougt to be condoning the ANI-fest. Take care! [[User:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:black">'''——'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:black">''SerialNumber''</span>]][[User talk:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:#8B0000">54129</span>]] 13:22, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::::Their IP number may change (or have changed) in the intervening time, so they're unlikely to get blocked unless they resume. It would be a good idea to review their contributions. They changed dates and removed text with no explanation in the two articles I checked. I reverted those but I'm about to log off, so someone else can finish the washing-up. [[User:BlackcurrantTea|BlackcurrantTea]] ([[User talk:BlackcurrantTea|talk]]) 13:26, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
== Dubious renaming of hundreds of articles over many years ==
*TLDR: {{U|Fergananim}} has moved almost 500 articles to dubious titles over a period of 13 years.
Two articles on my watchlist were moved three days ago: [[Rory O'Moore]] to {{noredirect|Ruairí Ó Mórdha}} and [[Rory O'More]] to {{noredirect|Ruairí Óg mac Ruairí Caoch Ó Mórdha}}. While the first is the subject's name in Irish – though not commonly used in the sources – the second is completely made up. Checking the histories of the articles and their talk pages, I found that the user, {{U|Fergananim}} had already moved both articles in July 2011, one of them ''[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rory_O%27Moore&offset=20110713000000&action=history three times in one hour]'' to three equally inappropriate names, and that I had reverted and discussed the moves on both talk pages at the time. When I raised the matter on the [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland#Irish names for historical figures|WikiProject Ireland talk page]], one respondent, {{U|SeoR}}, said that <s>he had discussed</s> problems with article renaming had been discussed with Fergananim in 2017 and 2018, and that Fergananim had "acknowledged themselves not to be an expert on Gaeilge (Irish)". A look at [[Special:Log/Fergananim]] shows that he/she has renamed almost 500 articles (plus 500 talk pages) over the course of 13 years, most of which were small articles with few or no watchers, where the readers would have no idea whether the new name was right or not. The edit summary was almost always just "correct form of name" (this from a person with no expertise), and as far as I know he/she did not discuss any of the moves on the talk pages. I am asking:
*that all of the moves be reverted, going back to 2006, if this is technically feasible and not too much trouble, and
*that Fergananim be asked by an admin not to perform any more page moves, at least not without prior discussion at the WikiProject Ireland talk page.
[[User:Scolaire|Scolaire]] ([[User talk:Scolaire|talk]]) 12:04, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:I have asked Fergananim in the past (see their talk page) to stop moving to non-common English names and stop changing names without valid sources. They have been known to change the names against all the references in articles and I did almost block them for it at one point. I hadn't noticed them come across my watchlist recently so it's not something that has come up again for me, but I can say this has been an extremely long term continuing problem that I had actually hoped was stopped. They do also seem to be just translating names into Irish instead of being able to prove those versions were actually used or existed. I acknowledge this is a problem. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 14:35, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::A disruptive POV pushing editor? Great. [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 14:38, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:I could certainly support an editing restriction against moving any articles. If there are any more ridiculous moves then an indefinite block would be valid. — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 14:39, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
===Topic Ban on moving pages?===
As the user has been disruptive in their moving of pages, I think a topic ban on moving pages for the user would be appropriate. As per [[WP:TBAN]] they would be prohibited from the actual moving of pages, as well as discussions on moving pages. I believe this would be a good first step towards stopping the disruptive moving that Fergananim performs.
Scope of the restricted actions as a result of the TBAN:
*The direct moving of any pages, except pages in the user's own userspace.
*The participation in move-related discussions.
This ban would be indefinite, and he would also be prohibited from appealing the topic ban for a minimum of one year from the date of the ban going into effect. <span style="background-color: orange; color: green">[[User:EggRoll97|EggRoll97]]</span> <sup>([[User_talk:EggRoll97|talk]]) </sup> 15:05, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
*'''Support''' - 13 years is plenty of time to change editing habits, they clearly haven't learned. <b style="background:#0000ff;font:Helvetica;padding:0.4em;font-size: 80%;border-radius: 2em;margin: 0.25em;">[[User:Cards84664|<span style="color: white;">Cards84664</span>]]</b> [[User talk:Cards84664|(talk)]] 15:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
*'''Support''' indefinite topic ban on making any undiscussed page moves (including own space). I '''oppose''' stopping this editor taking part in RMs at talk pages. [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 15:15, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
*I don't see the benefit in stopping them discussing moves — Martin <small>([[User:MSGJ|MSGJ]] · [[User talk:MSGJ|talk]])</small> 15:16, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' (in reply to GiantSnowman and MSGJ) I see your points. After a couple minutes of looking at them, the proposed move discussion restrictions seem ridiculous to me as well. I still think the restriction on ''undiscussed'' page moves is perfectly valid. <span style="background-color: orange; color: green">[[User:EggRoll97|EggRoll97]]</span> <sup>([[User_talk:EggRoll97|talk]]) </sup> 15:25, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
*{{ec}}'''Support''' both bans. Fergananim is not a joiner, so he/she is most unlikely to contribute to an existing RM. On the other hand, if he/she makes a move request on an article about an obscure historical figure, it will quite possibly not generate any response and thus be passed by default, even where it's wrong. A read through the user talk page will show that Fergananim is unable or unwilling to understand Wikipedia policy, preferring to use the argument that it "is generally scholarly practise here in Ireland." It's not, by the way. [[User:Scolaire|Scolaire]] ([[User talk:Scolaire|talk]]) 15:33, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
*Alternatively, he/she could be required to discuss moves on the [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland|WikiProject Ireland talk page]], where it will be seen, and not at the article talk page, where it very often won't. [[User:Scolaire|Scolaire]] ([[User talk:Scolaire|talk]]) 15:39, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
**You know, this could use application on a wider scale, not just for particular problems. [[User:Qwirkle|Qwirkle]] ([[User talk:Qwirkle|talk]]) 15:42, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
*'''Support moving topic ban, not preventing discussion''' - I'd also like to see them have a topic ban on changing names. Discussing them on talk pages is fine for consensus, but the user should not alter any names on the project. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 15:45, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
***So, what's the verdict, folks? [[User:Fergananim|Fergananim]] ([[User talk:Fergananim|talk]]) 11:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
****<small>{{reply|Fergananim}}[[WP:HERE|...níl thú anseo]]?! :D [[User:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:black">'''——'''</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:black">''SerialNumber''</span>]][[User talk:Serial Number 54129|<span style="color:#8B0000">54129</span>]] 11:21, 22 May 2019 (UTC)</small>
*****Verdict is for now I recommend you stop moving and changing names against references until something is decided. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<b style="color: Blue;">Canterbury Tail</b>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|<i style="color: Blue;">talk</i>]] 12:24, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*'''Support''' ban on moving pages, and on initiating move discussions. Not sure that banning them from move discussions initiated by others is a good thing, but I'm not going to stand in the way of the very needed ban on moving pages if it's a package deal. [[User:Thryduulf|Thryduulf]] ([[User talk:Thryduulf|talk]]) 12:31, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' Could an admin close this? It's been 24 hours as mandated by the [[WP:BAN|banning policy]]. <span style="background-color: orange; color: green">[[User:EggRoll97|EggRoll97]]</span> <sup>([[User_talk:EggRoll97|talk]]) </sup> 15:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*: {{re|EggRoll97}} There is [[WP:NOHURRY]]. Nor does it need an administrator close, consensus looks unanimous till now. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 15:15, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*'''Support''' ban on moving pages. Names should follow sources. [[User:Paul August|Paul August]] [[User_talk:Paul August|☎]] 17:39, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
== [[User:Renelibrary]] ==
{{atop|Overly aggressive filing, and everyone has said their piece twice now; no need to keep open. Thanks for all the great images, {{ping|Renelibrary}}, please remember to remove watermarks before uploading. Thanks for all the great images, {{ping|Magnolia677}}, please remember to cut the other humans some slack. --[[User:Floquenbeam|Floquenbeam]] ([[User talk:Floquenbeam|talk]]) 14:32, 22 May 2019 (UTC)}}
{{u5|Renelibrary}} This account appears to exist to promote the [http://www.rgomezphoto.com/ Rene Gomez Photography Studio]. This editor uploads images to their Commons account with the watermark "© Rene Gomez" or "©renegomezphotography.com", and then adds the photos to various English Wikipedia articles. The uploaded images are of historic buildings in Texas, while Rene Gomez Photography Studio does commercial photography. The editor was cautioned January 1, 2019 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Renelibrary&diff=876331515&oldid=869717830 here] by [[User:Danazar]] regarding their obligations per [[WP:WATERMARK]], but their promotional editing continues. Thank you. [[User:Magnolia677|Magnolia677]] ([[User talk:Magnolia677|talk]]) 15:37, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:I am very sorry. Dumb mistake on my part. I will remove the watermarks from further pics. {{redacted}} I apologize for the trouble. Thank you. [[User:Renelibrary|Renelibrary]]
::I disagree that the account is only for promotional purposes. Renelibrary has been participating in many of the Commons photo challenges for years, close to a decade. That's why Commons has those contests. In the process, he has contributed hundreds, if not thousands, of quality images on Texas properties, many of them NRHP and Recorded Texas Historic Landmarks. His contributions have been invaluable to Wikipedia, in particular WikiProject Texas. [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 16:13, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
[[WP:TROUT]] for the OP. Renelibrary's Commons contribs [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=&limit=500&contribs=user&target=Renelibrary&namespace=&tagfilter=&newOnly=1&start=&end=] show over 2,000 photos uploaded over the past decade. (Wow, thanks, Rene!) What Magnolia characterizes as a "caution" in January was actually a polite "hey, you forgot to take off the watermark" [[User talk:Renelibrary#Milford, Texas|message]] from Danazar, and Rene's contribs show that they fixed the problem. Unfortunately, based on my spot check, uploads since March have the watermark again. I'm sure that Rene will fix those as well. I do not think that Magnolia's [[User talk:Renelibrary#May 2019|level 3 warning]] was called-for–just a polite reminder would have been fine, rather than an escalation. The warning was posted at 15:09 today. After the warning, Rene uploaded two pictures to Commons ''without'' watermarks. [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Parkland2_(1_of_1).jpg] [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Abassador3_(1_of_1).jpg] For Magnolia to then file this ANI report–less than a half hour after the level 3 warning, and when Rene had ''complied'' with the warning–strikes me as trout-worthy. <span style="white-space:nowrap;">– [[User:Levivich|Leviv]]<span style="display:inline-block;position:relative;transform:rotate(45deg);bottom:-.57em;">[[User Talk:Levivich|ich]]</span></span> 17:50, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:I agree, I don't get the reason for filing this ANI, especially after the warning given to Renelibrary. I also agree with you that there should not have been a warning given, let alone a level 3 warning. [[User:Sir Joseph|Sir Joseph]] <sup>[[User_talk:Sir Joseph|<span style="color: Green;">(talk)</span>]]</sup> 17:59, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::FYI - We have some pretty great images on Commons, generally speaking, some uploaded by professional photographers. Has anyone see [[Commons: Category:Allan Warren]]. That one even has the photographer's infobox and official website link on it. No problem there. [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 20:29, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Indeed. Surely I'm not the only one who thinks that professional photographers donating images to Commons is something we very, very, very much want to ''encourage'', not ''discourage''. <span style="white-space:nowrap;">– [[User:Levivich|Leviv]]<span style="display:inline-block;position:relative;transform:rotate(45deg);bottom:-.57em;">[[User Talk:Levivich|ich]]</span></span> 20:47, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::::This editor was cautioned last January to stop posting the website for their company ''on the front of their photos''; they didn't get it and continued. I've made 9,804 edits to the Commons and taken 3rd place in two photo contests; that doesn't give me the right to advertize on the front of my photos. No doubt we could get many great photos if we allowed companies to post an ad on the front; I'd prefer to keep the project non-commercial. [[User:Magnolia677|Magnolia677]] ([[User talk:Magnolia677|talk]]) 22:25, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::(You wrote "on the front" three times... does that somehow make it worse? As opposed to "on the back" of a digital image?) I don't know what software Renelibrary is using, but a lot of software will just put these watermarks on all photos automatically when they're imported or exported. I can see how easy it would be for someone to forget to take it off for the photos they upload. It can also easily be cropped off, as the friendly reminder in January pointed out (which you keep calling a "caution", although that word is inappropriate to describe a message that says, essentially, "I can crop those off for you but it'd be better if you could re-upload them without the mark"). [[WP:AGF]] is important, and it means if someone forgets to take off their watermark, you assume good faith–you assume that it was a mistake (people even sometimes make the same mistake ''twice'')–and leave them a polite reminder, rather than a level-3 warning followed by an ANI post 30 minutes later. What really blows my mind is that they uploaded photos without watermarks after your level 3 warning, and you ''still'' filed at ANI. An over-the-top, ABF reaction. <span style="white-space:nowrap;">– [[User:Levivich|Leviv]]<span style="display:inline-block;position:relative;transform:rotate(45deg);bottom:-.57em;">[[User Talk:Levivich|ich]]</span></span> 14:24, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
{{abot}}
== Unacceptable behaviour by Ybsone ==
{{u5|Ybsone}}
I would like to report about the irrational behaviour of Ybsone. He edits pages without a source and when asked, behaves rudely. I would add links supporting my claim:
* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:History/Ferrari_575M_Maranello (here, it is seen how he refused to add a source when inquired and admitted he was just lazy to do so)
* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:History/Maserati_Coup%C3%A9 (another source highlighting his rude behaviour and non acceptance of sources when added. Also a violation of the three revert rule)
* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maserati_Coup%C3%A9#/talk/3 (here he tells me to contact Maserati myself while being rude and only presents a self centred blog in his defence)
* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:History/Maserati_Quattroporte (again, refusal to add a source and instead this [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/898133352 rude message] being posted on my talk page claiming that he is right when he has no proof backing up his theory)
I'm willing to put an end to his as I'm fed up with this user's behaviour. He has been the source of discouraging others to edit pages on Wikipedia by having a "I am always right" attitude. I request the admins to take appropriate action.[[User:U1Quattro|<span style="color:darkgreen;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #a6a6a6">''U<sup>1</sup> <sub>q</sub>uattro</span>]] [[User talk:U1Quattro|<span style="color:green;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #"><small>''TALK''</small></span>]] 18:57, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
*Hmmmm.... When I look at the histories and talk pages linked above, I see '''two''' editors being rude, '''two''' editors edit warring, '''two''' editors threatening to report the other to "the admins", and '''two''' editors arguing about the quality (or existence) of the other's sourcing. And to be honest (though I am not a car guy) it looks to me like U1Quattro is coming off as the worse of the two. I also note U1Quattro's recent blocks for similar behavior with another editor [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1009#Feud_with_U1Quattro (see here)], who he is still feuding with as of [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chevrolet_Camaro_(sixth_generation)&diff=prev&oldid=898155737 a few minutes ago] ("''until a consensus is reached, the edit I made stays''"? That's not how it works....). It would be appreciated (and wise) if {{ping|U1Quattro}} and {{ping|Ybsone}} both dialed back the pointless aggression and edit more collegially, so you don't waste other people's time. But [[User:U1Quattro]], you're getting pretty close to a significant block yourself. --[[User:Floquenbeam|Floquenbeam]] ([[User talk:Floquenbeam|talk]]) 19:42, 21 May 2019 (UTC
::{{u|Floquenbeam}} I have tried to reason with this user before but all he does is act rude for no reason when asked for sources for his edits. You may have already seen how he comes off on my talk page and has been pocketing evidence against me by threatening to report me.[[User:U1Quattro|<span style="color:darkgreen;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #a6a6a6">''U<sup>1</sup> <sub>q</sub>uattro</span>]] [[User talk:U1Quattro|<span style="color:green;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #"><small>''TALK''</small></span>]] 19:51, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Um, did you read what I wrote? --[[User:Floquenbeam|Floquenbeam]] ([[User talk:Floquenbeam|talk]]) 19:58, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::::Yes I did read that {{u|Floquenbeam}}. I'm not feuding with Vauxford as of now. I wrote that comment as he tends to revert edits back to what he personally thinks is right without seeking concensous on the subject matter's talk page. I don't know how am I getting close to another block as I have just been out of one. Also, administrator intervention was necessary as Ybsone continues to edit without source with no change in his behaviour.[[User:U1Quattro|<span style="color:darkgreen;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #a6a6a6">''U<sup>1</sup> <sub>q</sub>uattro</span>]] [[User talk:U1Quattro|<span style="color:green;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #"><small>''TALK''</small></span>]] 20:02, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::Although I'm taking great care to not start up what happen in the past between me and U1Quattro but I'm not impressed that shortly after his block he has already reverted a edit I did and done the usual "I'll take the matters to administration" threat on my talkpage, as pointed out by Floquenbeam. --[[User:Vauxford|Vauxford]] ([[User talk:Vauxford|talk]]) 06:55, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:I will state my case, and would like to point out at this time that I am constantly being harrassed by [[User:U1Quattro]]. My edits were reverted at least 19 times over the past 9 months and not once was it necessary, and not once was it correct.<br>
:1. 612: [[Special:Diff/855578814]] My edit was reverted just on occasion of rewriting the article. With this correct engine links were reverted. Vandalism of my work.<br>
:2. 575M: [[Special:Diff/879639849]] My correct, and later, sourced edit was reverted, even though previously there also was no source. [[Special:Diff/880025334]] Here I presented that my claim was sourced but it was deleted not improved anyway [[Special:Diff/880107734]] and [[User:U1Quattro]] begun a conversation accusing me of being lazy. His rude behaviour and unwillingness to improve an article. And so I inserted a source [[Special:Diff/880427587]], which was deleted maliciously [[Special:Diff/880566579]] and replaced by a "credible" source, ie. a forum... [[Special:Diff/880569080]]. My later update of dividing production numbers into two completely different models (practice very common) was just deleted [[Special:Diff/894035517]] because it is, quote: "Too confusing.", whch will be a very often defense mechanism for [[User:U1Quattro]], so he deleted it from infobox altogether. Again I see this as vandalism of my work.<br>
:3. 599: [[Special:Diff/880107892]] A very long engine size was shortened as is common in any other Ferrari model but this edit was reverted because [[User:U1Quattro]] deemed it: "Not needed." It was then reverted yet again [[Special:Diff/880566293]]. [[User:U1Quattro]] then begun edit warring [[Special:Diff/891852265]] and [[Special:Diff/891870862]] about a picture clearly inserted into wrong place and was deaf to any constructive arguments. Especially frustrating when they are correct and with a little attention I would not have to waste my time to do one edit three times.
:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:U1Quattro#Ferrari_599 When I tried to peacefully point out what are we talking about he accusses me of being rude.<br>
:4. EB 112: Source I presented is the highest authority on Bugatti EB 110 and 112, but: [[Special:Diff/881425458]], [[Special:Diff/883089248]] Here he states that source shows 2 cars (it shows 3) [[Special:Diff/883134358]] Still stubbornly argues that he only sees 2 cars. [[Special:Diff/883136624]] Here he claims he added a more reliable source, that just proves my point further but after 4 revertions. Time surely wasted. Also see talk page for EB 112: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bugatti_EB_112 where he claims that this "unofficial registry" is... "confusing" when it isn't. I even posted three separate links to three chassis numbers [[Special:Diff/883138743]].<br>
:5. F50: [[Special:Diff/885645951]] I was not asked for a source my edit was just reverted. He could have just followed the link.<br>
:6. Coupé: [[Special:Diff/893820486]] [[Special:Diff/893818480]] [[Special:Diff/893802825]] [[Special:Diff/893778756]] [[Special:Diff/893739643]] [[Special:Diff/893737761]] [[Special:Diff/893736904]] [[Special:Diff/893716503]] [[Special:Diff/893710908]] [[Special:Diff/893710349]] [[Special:Diff/893606976]] [[Special:Diff/893606872]] [[Special:Diff/893606503]] [[Special:Diff/893606228]] [[Special:Diff/893349542]] (other members of the community also helped providing proofs of facts stated by me, to no effect)
:Coupé talk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Maserati_Coup%C3%A9#Maserati_Spyder_90th_Anniversary_name
:Coupé talk on U1Quattro talk: Deleted by him [[Special:Diff/896526399]]
:Coupé talk on my talk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ybsone#April_2019 with a racial outburst about a japanese trading site that showed a limited edition 3200 GT for japanese market with a plaque that said Japan [[Special:Diff/893720057]]
:7. Ghibli (M157) talk (after being stuck in a ill-logic loop that an era-successor is also the successor to every individual car type) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Maserati_Ghibli_(M157)#Predecessor just a pearl of his logic:
: "The Quattroporte IV was itself based on the BiTurbo so it never succeeded Amy of the Biturbo family cars."
: "The Ghibli II succeeded the BiTubro and was based on the BiTurbo"
: [[Special:Diff/895002665]] he also changed one of his claims after my reply
:8. Quattroporte [[Special:Diff/898127851]] Again not asked to show a source (should I be asked for a source to prove what I see on the picture? Really?? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2006_Maserati_Quattroporte_-_Flickr_-_The_Car_Spy_(4).jpg ) my edit was reverted just to start a war with yet another user. I showed a source anyway.
:Quattroporte talk on U1Quattro talk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:U1Quattro#Maserati_Quattroporte when I asked for him to stop reverting my contributions and he gets offended?? [[User:Ybsone|YBSOne]] ([[User talk:Ybsone|talk]]) 20:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::To that I can say I'm not rude. I'm defending facts. [[User:Ybsone|YBSOne]] ([[User talk:Ybsone|talk]]) 20:29, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:::{{u|Ybsone}} your proofs clearly show that you edited without a source in the first place. On the 575 page, you added a source in the edit summary and not in the article which is not how it works. You only add source when you are done arguing and I'm sorry to say, this is not how editing works on here.[[User:U1Quattro|<span style="color:darkgreen;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #a6a6a6">''U<sup>1</sup> <sub>q</sub>uattro</span>]] [[User talk:U1Quattro|<span style="color:green;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #"><small>''TALK''</small></span>]] 20:30, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::::About the EB110 page, yes I was wrong but you could've been more courteous while pointing out my error which you clearly didn't do and kept on adding some unofficial registry. This was resolved once I added a more credible source. Your "defense" of the facts is not only unethical but it also discourages me to keep editing.[[User:U1Quattro|<span style="color:darkgreen;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #a6a6a6">''U<sup>1</sup> <sub>q</sub>uattro</span>]] [[User talk:U1Quattro|<span style="color:green;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #"><small>''TALK''</small></span>]] 20:32, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::{{u|Ybsone}} I can clean my talkpage. I am not estopped from doing so especially when the discussions are not active anymore.[[User:U1Quattro|<span style="color:darkgreen;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #a6a6a6">''U<sup>1</sup> <sub>q</sub>uattro</span>]] [[User talk:U1Quattro|<span style="color:green;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #"><small>''TALK''</small></span>]] 20:33, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:You claim that I don't source my work, but You don't do it [[Special:Diff/893710908]] [[Special:Diff/893720240]]. Difference being that I am a journalist.<br>
:You claim that EB 110/112 website is just some unimportant unofficial registry. His website is THE website for EB 110 and 112. Just like mine is for the GTV/Spider: http://www.bozhdynsky.com/alfa-romeo-gtv-spider-history/ and Lancia Lybra and Maserati Coupé. Researching italian cars' history is very tough. I know it and You clearly don't.
:You claim that I asked You to contact Maserati. If You did: http://www.bozhdynsky.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/maseratispyder90thanniversary.jpg http://www.bozhdynsky.com/cars/interview-with-maserati-heritage/
:You claim that I incorrectly sourced 575M manual transmissions. But You reverted that edit... to my edit that was before [[Special:Diff/818782708]] and yet lack of source didn't bother You at all.
:You claim that I didn't source that Quattroporte V intake is plastic and black. I don't have to source every single fact that can be, with open eyes, clearly seen on the picture and I won't be bullied to do so.
:You claim that You can clean Your talk page, yet 599 talk is still there and was older than Coupé talk. Interesting.
:You claim that I should accept any sources, any time. Nothing furthest from the truth. As I told You many times be inquisitive not repetitive. You have presented countless sources and all of them were wrong and unacceptable.
:You claim that I should encourage You to edit and be more courteous while pointing out Your errors. Yet You don't have to adhere to Your rules. [[User:Ybsone|YBSOne]] ([[User talk:Ybsone|talk]]) 21:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::Oh so you're a journalist what would you now claim next? That you are a historian? It's that behaviour of yours which is the most repulsive of all. You are repetitively stating a personal blog as a source which is run by you and you hae basically [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/818411451 "ordered"] me to use this source. Who do you even think you are? Some kind of a dictator? I think that Ferrari owners, who own the cars and are in contact with Ferrari are more reliable sources than a personal self researched blog-site which has been forcefully used here. Yes I did contact Maserati and they got back to me with the owners manual. Frankly, I don't have any blogs to post the records there. Yes you do have to source every other "fact" that you think is right, otherwise it is just self research. I only see a lack of understanding to the policies which are followed here. FYI, a talk page is a user's personal name space and he can use it the way he wants. You don't have any right to direct me what should I keep and what I shouldn't. This kind of behaviour is unacceptable and I wouldn't let this slide.[[User:U1Quattro|<span style="color:darkgreen;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #a6a6a6">''U<sup>1</sup> <sub>q</sub>uattro</span>]] [[User talk:U1Quattro|<span style="color:green;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #"><small>''TALK''</small></span>]] 03:34, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:Yes I am a historian. I have researched automotive history with many successes and published my findings on my personal website mainly. My historical research of type 916 Alfa Romeo GTV and Spider is unparalleled in the world and widely respected in it's community. It was even commended by Cenrto Documentazione AR. You on the other hand were tasked by community and me to research one simple fact, like a name of a limited edition, and failed. You asked wrong questions and got same answers. I asked right questions, again, and received a confirmation of facts I already knew. Consensus was reached and You were still stubborn. You claim You needed sources, but when I provided credible and primary ones You change them to Yours. You don't want facts You want Your facts.
:I was very patient over the months of harassment. Even didn't participate in recent actions against You from other user, although I did reply to what I was asked to provide. You wanted to start this fight by provoking me with vandalism [[Special:Diff/898127851]] and You got it. Now You manipulate opinions that You are the victim. You are not a victim but an agressor. First thing You do afer block is lifted You harass all of Your "enemies", undoing work of at least 5 different users. Admins can see Yours and mine contribution history. You are the dictator because You don't care about consensus nor facts. You claim to respect policies yet You constantly vandalise my work, replace primary sources with uncredible secondary ones, attack personally, threat, edit war and for this I expect [[User:U1Quattro]] to be blocked by Administrators.
:Should Administrators have any further questions towards me I am at their disposal.
:With regards, Yaroslav Bozhdynsky, historian. [[User:Ybsone|YBSOne]] ([[User talk:Ybsone|talk]]) 08:33, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::Do you even know what harrasement is? I think you need to have a look at the definition of what harrasement is before you start to act as a victim of harassment. That is a very bold claim that you're making about your research and everything else which was "successful" and has recieved "acclaim". Infact, I don't even see a mention about you in the automotive press let alone the Italian automotive press and I haven't seen any proof where this is verifiable. Wikipedia isn't about you or your facts where you go on to claim that your "work" is vandalised. I have now found [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ybsone#/talk/7 solid evidence] that your website is in violation of the policies here as pointed out by {{u|72Dino}} and hence cannot be used as a source in the articles here. Yet you had the audacity to come out on my talk page and force me to use the site. I wasn't tasked by anyone to do research on the sources, I did it on my own free will and shared the response which I got in return. You on the other hand, posted your own blog in which it was highly unclear about the said conversation you were pointing at. I do care about concensous when it is actually reached, I do not care about self researched facts because those aren't allowed here. I have provided my evidence and that shows how you behave and force others to stay along at work and act like this site is all about you. That's all I have to say.[[User:U1Quattro|<span style="color:darkgreen;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #a6a6a6">''U<sup>1</sup> <sub>q</sub>uattro</span>]] [[User talk:U1Quattro|<span style="color:green;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #"><small>''TALK''</small></span>]] 08:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:You were using ferrarichat.com/forum [[Special:Diff/818411451]] that clearly violates policies as being self-published and uverifiable. Also the production sums are way different from official Ferrari claims. Yet in 2018 You had absolutely no problem with it what so ever, because of double standard. My note: "Please do not use this source in the future" is not an order nor forceful. You are manipulating facts to Your advantage and blowing them out of proportion. [[User:Ybsone|YBSOne]] ([[User talk:Ybsone|talk]]) 10:02, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::There you have it. Does the manufacturer who is manufacturing the car knows better how many were produced or some self proclaimed historian and journalist who has no sources on where he got his information? I will let the admins decide.[[User:U1Quattro|<span style="color:darkgreen;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #a6a6a6">''U<sup>1</sup> <sub>q</sub>uattro</span>]] [[User talk:U1Quattro|<span style="color:green;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #"><small>''TALK''</small></span>]] 10:32, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::And as usual whenever is convenient You manipulate Your own positions: [[Special:Diff/893874280]] [[Special:Diff/880569080]] Double standard. [[User:Ybsone|YBSOne]] ([[User talk:Ybsone|talk]]) 10:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::On the Ferrari 575 page, I just changed wording of a sentence, that doesn't change its meaning. Just accept that you're out of justifications now. Plus about the Maserati talkpage, I talked about my doubts but accepted the name as is.[[User:U1Quattro|<span style="color:darkgreen;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #a6a6a6">''U<sup>1</sup> <sub>q</sub>uattro</span>]] [[User talk:U1Quattro|<span style="color:green;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #"><small>''TALK''</small></span>]] 11:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
{{out}}
Both of you, '''stop'''. ANI is not for content disputes, it's for behavioral issues. And all you've managed to do is prove that you're both fighting, instead of collaborating. — <b>[[User:HandThatFeeds|<span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS; color:DarkBlue;cursor:help">The Hand That Feeds You</span>]]:<sup>[[User talk:HandThatFeeds|Bite]]</sup></b> 17:03, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::Well, I reported him for his odd behaviour which is clearly showing here.[[User:U1Quattro|<span style="color:darkgreen;font-family:Verdana;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #a6a6a6">''U<sup>1</sup> <sub>q</sub>uattro</span>]] [[User talk:U1Quattro|<span style="color:green;text-shadow:2px 2px 2px #"><small>''TALK''</small></span>]] 18:57, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
== MOS:ETHNICITY on articles about Polish Jews ==
In the few weeks I've noticed some odd goings-on at the biographies of various Polish Jews with questionable, or even odious histories. Specifically, there seems to be a concerted effort to label them as "Jewish", and not as "Polish", generally in apparent ignorance or defiance of [[MOS:ETHNICITY]] and the "Nationality" parameter in Infobox person. I think I first noticed it at {{article|Salomon Morel}}, but it has been particularly apparent at {{article|Chaim Rumkowski}}, where multiple IPs and new/seldom-used accounts have shown up to make edits like [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chaim_Rumkowski&type=revision&diff=896406646&oldid=895368812 this], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chaim_Rumkowski&type=revision&diff=897330512&oldid=897175505 this], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chaim_Rumkowski&type=revision&diff=897523962&oldid=897347901 this], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chaim_Rumkowski&type=revision&diff=897563263&oldid=897556590 this], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chaim_Rumkowski&type=revision&diff=897621787&oldid=897575891 this], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chaim_Rumkowski&type=revision&diff=897684593&oldid=897628760 this], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chaim_Rumkowski&type=revision&diff=898125756&oldid=898124494 this] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chaim_Rumkowski&type=revision&diff=898155069&oldid=898126834 this]. There does not seem to be any similar effort to designate other types of biographies of Polish Jews (e.g. resistance fighters such as [[Yitzhak Zuckerman]], [[Frumka Płotnicka]], [[Hirsch Berlinski]], [[Chaike Belchatowska Spiegel]]) as "Jewish" and not "Polish". It seems unlikely that seldom used accounts such as {{user|Sophiel777}}, {{user|Rordayukki}}, {{user|Szydlot}}, {{user|Albertus teolog}}, {{user| Waćpan}}, {{user|Tashi}} suddenly discovered this article/dispute by chance. There is now a section on the article's talk page discussing the issue, but my concern is much more regarding the source of this influx of suddenly activated/reactivated and highly motivated editors. [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg]] <sup><small>[[User talk:Jayjg|<span style="color: DarkGreen;">(talk)</span>]]</small></sup> 19:52, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:There have been ongoing edit conflicts on wiki with editors who insist that Jewishness is a distinct and exclusive ethnicity and, for instance, one can't be both Jewish and Polish or Jewish and German, individuals are one of the other. Perennial pov conflict that needs attention? [[Special:Contributions/209.152.44.201|209.152.44.201]] ([[User talk:209.152.44.201|talk]]) 20:09, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::I have seen some of that too; this board relatively recently had an incident of a long-term IP editor who seemed to believe one couldn't be both Swedish and Jewish, and kept replacing "Swedish" with "Jewish". [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg]] <sup><small>[[User talk:Jayjg|<span style="color: DarkGreen;">(talk)</span>]]</small></sup> 20:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:This seems to be a bit distorted version of the events.I have actually seen attempts to remove mention of Jewish ethnicity from articles about individuals who collaborated with Nazis leaving only Polish in the lead first sentence, under pretext that it indicates nationality[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adam_Czerniak%C3%B3w&type=revision&diff=896921379&oldid=896919544].Also in case of Salomon Morel the issue has been it seems debated since years looking at history of the page.For the record reliable sources in cases of individuals with complicated identity often use the term Polish-Jewish as per Per [[Anne Applebaum]] "Iron Curtain: The Crushing of Eastern Europe 1944-56 "the unusual case of Salomon Morel, who – all agree – was a Polish Jew and a communist partisan" New York Magazine - 9 Mau 1994.
:Per MOS:ETHNICITY MOS:ETHNICITY,that ethnicity can be mentioned “Ethnicity, religion, or sexuality should generally not be in the lead unless it is relevant to the subject's notability.” The cases where somebody was involved in Holocaust and it played a major role in his life, or used his ethnic background as defence against persectution for crimes and it caused international controversy are I believe good reasons for mentioning the ethnicity in the first sentence.I believe the proper description would be Polish-Jewish rather than solely Polish or just Jewish in cases where Jewish ethnicity played a major role in life of a citizen of Poland. I believe the proper description would be Polish-Jewish rather than solely Polish or just Jewish in cases where Jewish ethnicity played a major role in life of a citizen of Poland.
:As for recent activity it seems that popular publicist [[Rafal Ziemkiewicz]] re-tweeted this characterization on his twitter webpage recentely[https://twitter.com/Wikipedysta/status/1129472654526865408], which probably led to people reading this to react. I don't know how to link to re-tweet, as I don't use twitter much.--[[User:MyMoloboaccount|MyMoloboaccount]] ([[User talk:MyMoloboaccount|talk]]) 20:11, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::Thanks, that could help explain the recent influx of editors at the Rumkowski article, though perhaps not at others. [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg]] <sup><small>[[User talk:Jayjg|<span style="color: DarkGreen;">(talk)</span>]]</small></sup> 20:17, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::Oh, and regarding [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adam_Czerniaków&type=revision&diff=896921379&oldid=896919544 this] edit you criticized above, you do realize that the nationality parameter on infobox person is only for citizenship, not ethnicity, don't you? [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg]] <sup><small>[[User talk:Jayjg|<span style="color: DarkGreen;">(talk)</span>]]</small></sup> 20:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Yes, it is a fact that the tweet was the cause of interest because many people have noticed that in case of hideous Jewish characters, their Jewishness have been erased from the article. We need to remember that people as Chaim Rumkowsky wasn't in fact Polish. They have Polish citizenship but they didn't identify with Poland and Polish nation (as many Jews in that time in history). Another example may be the recent edition in [[Stefan Michnik]] which was a Stalinist judge who was responsible for murdering many Polish anti-communist soldiers, generals etc. All information about his sentences have been deleted even though I provided two different sources. All of them have been marked as "too far-right". User {{u|Jayjg}} was the topic on many Wikipedia forums and here's the one [http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1088&p=20814 click]. Different people regardless of their political beliefs accuse him of being partial when it comes to Jewish-related articles. [[User:Tashi|<span style="color:Green">'''Tashi'''</span>]] [[User talk:Tashi|<sub><b><span style="color: red">'''Talk to me'''</span></b></sub>]] 20:26, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:Tashi, I suggest less emotional approach.I know that some of the crimes comitted by Nazi collaborators or Soviet executioners can be upsetting but it's best to keep professional attitude and don't use insults, I suggest you re-write your sentence a it.
:From a technical point of view I encountered a similiar problem once before:mainly the units of [[Selbstschutz]] in Poland 1939 were made of Germans with Polish nationality living in Poland that fought against Polish state. Would it be fitting to describe such individuals as Polish? I am sure this would seem wrong and there should be description of their ethnicity as well in order not to confuse the readers. --[[User:MyMoloboaccount|MyMoloboaccount]] ([[User talk:MyMoloboaccount|talk]]) 20:46, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:: Trust me that I'm trying to keep it as professional as possible but I also wanted to point out some facts that seems to be constantly omitted. I have nothing against {{u|Jayjig}} or any other user and I think we can work out and reach a consensus :) Though, there's a space for the debate about the nationality since that term is understood differently worldwide and it can be the bone of contention. I understand the argument that nationality is somehow related to the citizenship but there is no doubt that calling people like Rumkowsky as Polish is totally misunderstanding since he did not identify himself as Polish. Someone suggested the term "Russian-born Polish Jew" and I think that would be acceptable historically [[User:Tashi|<span style="color:Green">'''Tashi'''</span>]] [[User talk:Tashi|<sub><b><span style="color: red">'''Talk to me'''</span></b></sub>]] 20:54, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
: '''Comment'''. Note that I have extended-confirmed protected [[Chaim Rumkowski]], it is clearly appropriate as the semi-protection (where I was the protecting admin) is not working as designed.--[[User:Ymblanter|Ymblanter]] ([[User talk:Ymblanter|talk]]) 21:05, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::: '''Comment''' - I do not see why there need to be labels made in the article about [[Chaim Rumkowski]]. Disputes concerning nationality or descent are common and tend to be left out in most cases when a consensus is not achieved, as in [[Nicolaus Copernicus]] where only occupation is stated. However, it is appropriate to consider where the person lived, worked and/or obtained citizenship. Rumkowski held Polish citizenship and lived in Poland which is a dominating factor. In general context, I cannot stress enough that "Jewish" is '''not''' a nationality only an identity based on both racial descent and religion. All Polish Jews (considering they haven't emigrated) that are either secular or not Orthodox should be labelled as "Polish" per citizenship laws. "Polish-Jewish" or simply "Jewish" is a term appropriate for rabbis and religious or spiritual leaders. You do not see the label "American-Jewish" in articles about American actors, musicians, soldiers or politicians that are of Jewish heritage. [[User:Oliszydlowski|Oliszydlowski]], 09:24, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
MOS:Ethnicity is not based on religious criteria, and for purely MOS comparison(not character), [[Janusz Korczak]] or [[Anne Frank]] have their ethnicity mentioned in the lead.I agree that usually it’s not needed, but in cases where it played huge role(Morel for example)and RS point this out ethnicity should be mentioned.Also contrary to your assesment we have actors described as American-Jewish, ie [[Leo Fuchs]] or [[Menasha Skulnik]][User:MyMoloboaccount|MyMoloboaccount]] ([[User talk:MyMoloboaccount|talk]]) 23:39, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
*'''Comment''': I'm disturbed by the statement from {{U|Tashi}}, {{tq|We need to remember that people as Chaim Rumkowsky ''wasn't in fact Polish''. They have Polish citizenship but they ''didn't identify with Poland and Polish nation'' (as many Jews in that time in history).}} (emphasis mine). This is reminiscent of the "exclusionary antisemitism" common in pre-war Europe. Compare with:
::;Exclusionary Antisemitism
::The exclusionary nature of antisemitism derives from the perception that the Jew stands outside the nation, and represents an alternative nation or an anti-national, internationalist collective. This idea thrived in the early twentieth century when Jews were said to be internationalist, and thus to stand against the interests of national communities. Because there are distinct Jewish communities in many countries, antisemites alleged that: 1) Jewish communities conspire to advance their collective interests to the detriment of their "host" countries and 2) the dominant forms taken by this conspiracy in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries are international finance and communism. In making such claims, antisemites sought to push out the Jew altogether.
:[https://www.ajc.org/anti-semitism-an-assault-on-human-rights Source]. To go with Tashi's quote, see their edit here: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chaim_Rumkowski&diff=prev&oldid=898155069]. --[[User:K.e.coffman|K.e.coffman]] ([[User talk:K.e.coffman|talk]]) 03:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::: Oh yeah, antisemitism. Sorry but if the discussion is going to be about playing the antisemitism card then I'm out. I don't know how well you're familiar with Polish history but it is a fact that a lot of Jewish people didn't even speak Polish though they had lived there for a few centuries. It's not only about Polish only. That's historical fact and what's antisemitic about it? The other thing, yes I added he was a Jewish businessman because that information had been deleted. It's not something I made up. I used to say he was a Polish Jew but someone is trying to delete that information and I don't know why [[User:Tashi|<span style="color:Green">'''Tashi'''</span>]] [[User talk:Tashi|<sub><b><span style="color: red">'''Talk to me'''</span></b></sub>]] 06:14, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::: Just got [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Icewhiz&diff=898234069&oldid=897942153 these kind words from a newly created account on my talk]. I will note that comments on {{tq|"playing the antisemitism card"}}, and above that editing of WWII historical articles was prompted by tweets by [[Rafal Ziemkiewicz]], are deeply concerning. Some context on Ziemkiewicz is in order: [https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/16/polish-far-right-speaker-rafa-ziemkiewiczc-ancels-uk-visit-hate-speech Guardian 2018] (visit cancelled to UK, views on Muslims, gays, and Jews, Ziemkiewicz calling UK "fascist"), [https://nationalpost.com/news/world/polish-pm-cancels-israel-visit-amid-new-holocaust-tensions National Post, 2019] (comments on Jew hatred), [https://www.jta.org/2018/01/31/global/polish-television-hosts-suggests-use-of-term-jewish-death-camps JTA 2018] ("scabs" for jews), [https://www.timesofisrael.com/polish-journalist-calls-jewish-ngo-a-gang-of-international-blackmailers/ JTA 2018] (WJC - "gang of international blackmailers"), [http://www.feswar.org.pl/fes2009/pdf_doc/IPA_Poland_24_10_2012.pdf Pankowski, Rafał. Right-wing extremism in Poland. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Department for Central and Eastern Europe, 2012.] (endorsement of a book advocating that Poland should've allied itself with Hitler in 1939), [https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/pn.2016.6.issue-1/pn-2016-0011/pn-2016-0011.pdf Minkner, Kamil. "Polish contemporary art to the anti-semitism of Poles and its political significance." Review of Nationalities 6.1 (2016): 195-221.] (views on [[Jedwabne pogrom]] and antisemitism). [[User:Icewhiz|Icewhiz]] ([[User talk:Icewhiz|talk]]) 08:23, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::::: I don't agree. In my POV those comments was prmoted by this: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/262593 ("'Israeli minister who made anti-Polish remarks a stupid idiot’ Prominent Holocaust survivor Ed Mosberg blasts Israeli FM over anti-Polish comments". Artcile date 02/05/19 16:10 [[User:Rordayukki|Rordayukki]] ([[User talk:Rordayukki|talk]]) 19:01, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
I have no idea about the particular case, but have come across the attitude (in exactly the way it has been put) in a number of articles relating to Jewish-Polish relations. I said it there and I will say it here, saying that this is an anti-Semitic trope. Apart from a very small number of ultra-orthodox Jews there is no evidence the Jews refused to speak (or did not see themselves) as Polish (serving in both the home army and the Free Polish forces). I think a topic ban is in order. We cannot and should not allow the propagation of anti-Semitic tropes.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 08:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:I'd recommend caution, to avoid stiffing the debate through [[chilling effect]] and variations of [[Godwin's law]] and political correctness.
::[[Lucy Dawidowicz]] (a Polish-American-Jewish scholar) wrote "[https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=zMfwAsJrFV8C&pg=PA268&dq=Polish+jews+did+not+speak+polish&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjUnfK64q7iAhWsF6YKHZUgD04Q6AEINTAC Even the Jewish lower classes who did not speak Polish felt themselves part of Poland]." This, ironically, contradicts both Tashi - and you.
::Leo Cooper (from University of Melbourne) wrote [around WWII]] "[https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=zoCGDAAAQBAJ&lpg=PA168&dq=Polish%20jews%20did%20not%20speak%20polish&pg=PA168#v=onepage&q=Polish%20jews%20did%20not%20speak%20polish&f=false Many Jews either did not speak Polish, or spoke it badly]."
::[[Halik Kochanski]] (Polish-British historian) speaking for the same time period estimated that [https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=EJ5vIyDBpLcC&lpg=PA314&dq=Polish%20jews%20did%20not%20speak%20polish&pg=PA314#v=onepage&q=Polish%20jews%20did%20not%20speak%20polish&f=false "80 per cent were unassimilated and therefore did not speak Polish"]. (through TBH I find 80% a rather surprisingly high figure)
::[[Iwo Pogonowski]] likewise wrote that "[https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=Iw8oAQAAMAAJ&q=Polish+jews+did+not+speak+polish&dq=Polish+jews+did+not+speak+polish&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi5rYaa5a7iAhWMVbwKHS60Ccg4ChDoAQguMAE In national census of 1931 nearly ninety percent of the Jew reported that they did not speak Polish]". That said, [[Polish_census_of_1931#Mother_tongue_controversy]]... and I couldn't verify this with the document [http://statlibr.stat.gov.pl/exlibris/aleph/a22_1/apache_media/VUNVGMLANSCQQFGYHCN3VDLK12A9U5.pdf here], through perhaps it is simply not complete. It could be that IP confused speaking Polish with chosing Polish as the "mother tongue".
::[[Ewa Kurek ]] (Polish scholar, somewhat controversial) cites for example a report from the 1930s that said "[https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=xDNpdbdhNIgC&lpg=PA143&dq=Polish%20jews%20%22did%20not%20speak%20polish%22&pg=PA143#v=onepage&q=Polish%20jews%20%22did%20not%20speak%20polish%22&f=false In small towns, Jewish youth did not know the Polish language at all, only Yiddish or Hebrew. Young people did not speak Polish, and if they did, they spoke it they way I did – very poorly.]" and on the next page herself states that "On the eve of the outbreak of WWII, barely 15% of the Jewish population had knowledge of Polish language"
::[[Ezra Mendelsohn]] on the other hand suggested that around that time most of the youth were assimilated and spoke Polish, but this also suggested that it was a relatively new developoment ([https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=5_OXOwvjqjwC&lpg=PA67&dq=Polish%20jews%20did%20not%20speak%20polish&pg=PA67#v=onepage&q=Polish%20jews%20did%20not%20speak%20polish&f=false]).
::But [[Mordecai Schreiber]], a rabbi, wrote that "[https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=LzUZCwAAQBAJ&lpg=PA75&dq=Polish%20jews%20%22did%20not%20speak%20polish%22&pg=PA75#v=onepage&q=Polish%20jews%20%22did%20not%20speak%20polish%22&f=false many Jews did not speak Polish well ]"
::[[Celia Stopnicka Heller]], Polish-American sociologist, wrote (referring to the Orthodox Jews) "[https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=GmVt-O3AR34C&lpg=PA146&dq=Polish%20jews%20%22spoke%20no%20polish%22&pg=PA146#v=onepage&q=Polish%20jews%20%22spoke%20no%20polish%22&f=false Not infrequent among the older generations were those who spoke no Polish.]"
::Finally, British historian [[Norman Davies]] wrote "[https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=Jzxt9FFBDPwC&lpg=PT85&dq=Polish%20jews%20%22spoke%20no%20polish%22&pg=PT85 There was also a shrinking category of people who, though Poles in the sense of being Polish citizens, spoke no Polish, shunned wider social contacts, and lived in closed, ultra-Orthodox Yiddish-speaking communities. These ultra-Orthodox were dominant in the traditional shtetln or 'smal Jewish towns' of the countryside. but less so in the larger cities"]"
:I hpoe it is clear that it is 'antisemitic' to discus to what extent Polish Jews spoke Polish and identified with the Polish nation, and that someone who makes the argument that some, and perhaps most Polish Jews did not speak Polish, is not an anti-semite who deserves a topic ban. We should, of course, keep antisemitic discourse off this project, but the case discussed above is very much a normal academic issue, not 'an antisemitic trope'. PS. Personally, I am not convinced that 'most Polish Jews' did not spoke Polish, this may be an exaggeration, but it is one tha at least some scholars support. And I think the sources presented above make it very clear that at least a significant group of Polish Jews did not speak Polish (but whether that significant group was 10% or 90%, I have no opinion on yet). --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]|[[User talk:Piotrus|<span style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> reply here</span>]]</sub> 09:40, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::When someone does not say "some Jewish could not speak Polish" but rather "Jews were not Polish, and the evidence is they could not even speak our language". The issue is not that they could not speak Polish, but that they were not Polish, but rather They are a race and nation apart (see the quoted canard above).[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 11:32, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::: I've never written that Jews are not Polish. I just pointed out that many Jewish people who lived in Poland did not identify as Poles and it can be observed in fact that they did not know the language of the country they lived in and other arguments {{u|Piotrus}} mentioned. There have been thousands of Polish Jews who identified themselves with Polish and Polish culture. I really don't see anything antisemitic in that claiming. If banning is the way of discussion then I think that the idea of Wikipedia is already dead since we can disagree on many topics but we should try to reach a consensus. [[User:Tashi|<span style="color:Green">'''Tashi'''</span>]] [[User talk:Tashi|<sub><b><span style="color: red">'''Talk to me'''</span></b></sub>]] 15:11, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::::No you have just used it as an excuse to argue to certain types of people should not be called polish based upon no other evidence then they were Jewish. If you had provided some sources saying "X did ot indetofy" as Polish I would not have ascribed this view to the perpetuating of antisemitic canards. The fact is the only evidence you have produced (some of which even contracts your claim) is that some Jews could not speak Polish, ergo a particular jew (which not source has said could not speak Polish) was not Polish.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 15:23, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::That is not even evidence, since there is no natural historical equation between citizenship and fluency in the designated national language. You don't require it in Israel, be you Israeli Arab or a Jew making aliyah. Sometimes states stipulate this as a ''sine qua non'' (notoriously in Baltic states) but where ''ius soli'' defines citizenship, being born there automatically confers citizenship. When the US passed its citizenship act in 1924, that right automatically extended to indigenous peoples like the [[Navajo Nation|Navajo]], though many did not speak English, and even to this day, on a number of reservations studies indicate that 20% are monolingual, not knowing English, something which in no way imperils their citizenship identity. To give an extreme example when the Piripkura or [[Kawahiva]] were discovered in Amazonia, they were automatically Brazilian citizens since they were born there, though they didn't speak Brazilian. [[User:Nishidani|Nishidani]] ([[User talk:Nishidani|talk]]) 17:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::: [[User:Piotrus|Piotrus]] BTW, according to Halik Kochanski more than 80 % [[User:Rordayukki|Rordayukki]] ([[User talk:Rordayukki|talk]]) 19:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
{{od}} Wow, what a mess. In short - the lede should mention their nationality/citizenship only (X was a Polish astronomer, Y was an American writer etc.) and only mention ethnicity/religion if it is key to their notability - so Anne Frank should probably be described as Jewish but there is no need to describe Barack Obama as African-American, for example. [[User:GiantSnowman|Giant]][[User talk:GiantSnowman|Snowman]] 10:07, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*After reading this and reading some of what some are calling RS, I do think a TBAN for Tashi is in order. I saw a lot of links posted, so I am not sure if this was in the mix, but this is one of the sources being pushed, [https://www.timesofisrael.com/polish-journalist-calls-jewish-ngo-a-gang-of-international-blackmailers/]. This is not something we should allow on the encycopedia. Antisemitism or antisemitic tropes should not be tolerated or condoned. [[User:Sir Joseph|Sir Joseph]] <sup>[[User_talk:Sir Joseph|<span style="color: Green;">(talk)</span>]]</sup> 15:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*To {{U|Piotrus}}: pointing out ethnic tropes & bigotry is not {{tq|political correctness}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&type=revision&diff=898242368&oldid=898238743] run amok; it's basic human decency. Tashi doubles down and complains that some Jews did not speak Polish "though they had lived there for a few centuries" [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=898224857] -- ''there'' where? Between 1795 and 1918 Poland did not exist as a nation state. Jews (and Poles, Belorussians, Ukrainians, etc) lived in the multi-ethnic German, Astro-Hungarian, and Russian empires. I could equally accuse Poles of not 100% speaking Russian, German, or Yiddish, even though they "lived there" for over a century, but that would be silly.
:Then there's Tashi's targeting of {{U|Jayjg}}: {{tq|User Jayjg was the topic on many Wikipedia forums and here's the one. Different people regardless of their political beliefs accuse him of being partial when it comes to Jewish-related articles.}} This is highly inappropriate. --[[User:K.e.coffman|K.e.coffman]] ([[User talk:K.e.coffman|talk]]) 02:46, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
== Copyright Template is preventing me from saving an hour-long edit ==
{{archive top|result=Not for ANI. But it's resolved. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 07:58, 22 May 2019 (UTC)}}
Hi! I noticed some unsourced edits happening on [[Celia Fisher]], so I added the major edit template to the page a couple hours ago and have been working on overhauling it. When I went to publish the changes (at least an hour of work), I get an HTTP error. Going back around to the front of the page, I see the prior editor's unsourced additions caused the copyright trigger just a few minutes ago. Would you mind removing the template so I can save all the edits I've made to the page? I'd hate to lose them (and I know there won't be a copyright issue with my changes). Thank you!<br><b>[[User:Orville1974|<span style="color: darkred;">Orville1974</span>]]</b> ([[User talk:Orville1974|talk]]) 22:19, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:{{ping|Orville1974}} I don't think it's the copyright template itself preventing you from saving the changes, it's the fact that there's now an [[WP:Edit conflict|Edit conflict]]. So anything we do won't help. The way edit conflicts are handled seems to be wonky lately, so the safest thing to do is save the text of the edit you're trying to make in a text editor, cancel your edit, and re-do it, copy-pasting your text. --[[User:Floquenbeam|Floquenbeam]] ([[User talk:Floquenbeam|talk]]) 22:23, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
OK. Thank you. <b>[[User:Orville1974|<span style="color: darkred;">Orville1974</span>]]</b> ([[User talk:Orville1974|talk]]) 22:26, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
<br><br>I've managed to copy over all my edits. Whenever an admin gets a chance, please swing by the page to clear the copyright notice [[Celia Fisher]]. Thank you, again!<br><b>[[User:Orville1974|<span style="color: darkred;">Orville1974</span>]]</b> ([[User talk:Orville1974|talk]]) 22:50, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
{{archive bottom}}
== Edit-warring to insert mistakes and BLP violations on Lee J. Carter ==
I don't know if this is the right place to report this, but I fixed some serious problems on [[Lee J. Carter]] and now [[User:JesseRafe]] is edit-warring to put them back.
He won't discuss his changes, he won't address the specific issues I brought up, and he keeps threatening to have me blocked. This is a biography, but he's inserting claims that his own citations don't support, and he's padding these citations with duplicates!
He's just a vandal and a bully. [[Special:Contributions/24.47.152.65|24.47.152.65]] ([[User talk:24.47.152.65|talk]]) 22:47, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
: I saw some of the edits go by on recent changes and was concerned. I'll take a look. '''[[User:UninvitedCompany|<span style="color:green">Uninvited</span>]][[User_talk:UninvitedCompany|Company]]''' 22:49, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
: While there are routine editorial issues of balance and undue weight, I do not see any BLP violations. I do not believe that any administrator intervention is warranted at this time. '''[[User:UninvitedCompany|<span style="color:green">Uninvited</span>]][[User_talk:UninvitedCompany|Company]]''' 22:57, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
::I agree. This is part of the public record, so BLP has not been violated that I am able to observe. To what extent it belongs in the article is subject to [[WP:CON|consensus]]. I'd also caution the IP from using terms like "vandal and a bully" and aim instead at [[WP:AGF|good faith]]. [[User:El_C|El_C]] 23:06, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
:On [[Talk:Lee J. Carter]] the IP is at least correct in that none of the sources used support the "centrist Democrats" part about the "red-baiting" incident. [[User:DoubleCross|DoubleCross]] ([[User talk:DoubleCross|talk]]) 13:54, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::Thanks for removing the reduplicated source. It looks like that specific term was [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lee_J._Carter&diff=844881987&oldid=844402590 introduced almost a year ago], after the meat of the section was written and sourced. Looking at the history now, the IP and user FNAS were editing in what seems like tandem, and that user was previously making other edits to reduce the appearance of the critiques of Carter's leftism, for instance changing "[[red-baiting]]" to "mocked". I began reverting the edits (IP's and FNAS's) together, because they were always made sequentially and FNAS had been reverted by myself and other editors on this page previously for pushing a POV. Looking at the history, FNAS who has a history of warnings and blocks about pushing a POV on Marxism articles has stopped editing the page, but IP continued. But you are correct, it seems that "centrist" was added without cite and as it only started being removed (and called a "slur"!) this spring and in conjunction with other weaselly actions, I presumed to restore it to status quo ante. It's hardly a slur, definitely not a BLP concern, and objectively speaking, accurately describes what a moderate is. I don't think it needs to be sourced, as it's a plain description, but whatever. [[User:JesseRafe|JesseRafe]] ([[User talk:JesseRafe|talk]]) 14:41, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Then please go ahead and remove that unsupported term. I'd do it, but every time I do, Jesse edit-wars to put it back and then accuses me of edit-warring. [[Special:Contributions/24.47.152.65|24.47.152.65]] ([[User talk:24.47.152.65|talk]]) 21:19, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
{{comment}} As the editor reported here, please take a look at this IP's behavior and how I've frequently asked them to respect BRD (May 2nd, 6th, and 10th) to zero avail. They're edit-warring, albeit not 3RR, and when they mention "BLP" they're not doing so for the sake of the subject of the article, Carter, but for the subject of accusation of red-baiting (a term the IP is trying to neuter), the other delegate Keam. I think they have a COI with that delegate given they're an SPA to make the Carter article reflect less poorly on Keam. They're also gaslighting and trolling on the article talk page, and I wouldn't mind not being accused of threatening users (I never have, the IP has done so to me TWICE) or vandalizing or bullying. I rarely start proceedings against IPs unless they're an active and obvious vandal because I don't see the point, but since he or she is here, I request that their behavior be looked at, such as on the article talk page. Thanks, [[User:JesseRafe|JesseRafe]] ([[User talk:JesseRafe|talk]]) 13:05, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
== Personal attack ==
Personal attack by [[User:Ahmedo Semsurî]] calls me a troll.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurmanjis&diff=898120172] (and the word "satisfy" is offensive too) When I told there is nothing about his claim in this source on page 30: [https://libcom.org/files/van%20Bruinessen,%20Martin%20%5B1992%5D%20Agha,%20Shaikh%20and%20State%20-%20The%20Social%20and%20Political%20Structures%20of%20Kurdistan.pdf]
You can treat each other with respect rather than giving other users a name. [[Special:Contributions/83.110.196.147|83.110.196.147]] ([[User talk:83.110.196.147|talk]]) 00:19, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:Yes, that's not appropriate. I've had a word with them. [[User:El_C|El_C]] 00:30, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::Calling people trolls isn't within wikipedia guidelines, but its so subtle i think a warning is the most that can happen here. [[User:Wikiman5676|Wikiman5676]] ([[User talk:Wikiman5676|talk]]) 02:59, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::Uh, what? It's a [[WP:NPA|personal attack]]. I warned them about it. End of story (hopefully). [[User:El_C|El_C]] 03:06, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
== National Democratic Alliance (India) ==
On [[National Democratic Alliance (India)]] this anonymous editor keeps posting foreign content which breaks links. I tried to stop them, and [[user:David Biddulph]] has tried to stop them. I initially reported them to [[WP:AIV]], but I retracted the report because I was not sure this user's conduct constitutes obvious vandalism. [[User:CLCStudent|CLCStudent]] ([[User talk:CLCStudent|talk]]) 12:01, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:then what does it constitute?[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 12:07, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
If you mean this [[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Democratic_Alliance_(India)&diff=898253605&oldid=898253565]] its definitely a case of not here. I am not going to list all the violations, but there are a few.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 12:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
: Zzuuzz already blocked the IP. [[User:NinjaRobotPirate|NinjaRobotPirate]] ([[User talk:NinjaRobotPirate|talk]]) 12:49, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:: And I protected the article for 3 days since they were not the only IP not editing constructively--[[User:Ymblanter|Ymblanter]] ([[User talk:Ymblanter|talk]]) 12:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::The election results are tomorrow, all Indian election-related articles will face an issue for another week or two. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 14:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::::That should keep the DS admins busy [[User:Nosebagbear|Nosebagbear]] ([[User talk:Nosebagbear|talk]]) 15:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
== Heavy rule breaking ==
Hello dear Administrators,
I decided and also was a little bit forced to create an account because someone accuses me of being a sock puppet and violates a rule relating his last block.
This is my IP: [[User:14.202.143.218]] I have reverted two edits from the [[User:Ahmedo Semsurî]] because I thought that quotes are fine then I decided to report him for Editwarring because I thought he started an Editwar. Then [[User:El C]] told me that there is no violation but it counts as an Editwar. The [[User:Ahmedo Semsurî]] started to accuses me of being a sock puppet when he wrote: „I think I get it now; using various IP's to make it look like I'm edit warring with everyone.“ Then the [[User:El C]] calls me a single-purpose account. I would be glad if he also participate in this discussion. It all seems to be a bit of a mess right now. As you can see in this noticeboard, Ahmedo Semsurî was in clashes with various IP adresses. Now when I saw his contributions, he had previously always tagging IP adresses with the sock puppertry-template (which is usually only in the power of Checkusers, SPI Clerks and Administrators) and calling them names and accuses them of being sock puppets.
Because the Editwar counts and as I saw his Block log. He was previously blocked for Editwarring. And then I find this: „user agrees to stop edit warring“ [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/block?page=User:Ahmedo+Semsurî] Since he started an Editwar again, he violated this rule and he also attacking other IP adresses and giving them names and tagging them for sock puppetry, he also violated a rule.
I am sure he will try again to connect me with a sock puppet or he will claim that I belong to the other IP adresses. [[User:LMB500|LMB500]] ([[User talk:LMB500|talk]]) 17:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:You need to provide diffs so we can see who said what and where. At these time these are (in essence) unsubstantiated allegations.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 17:15, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::You can read everything here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Ahmedo_Semsurî_reported_by_User:14.202.143.218_(Result:_No_vioaltion) [[User:LMB500|LMB500]] ([[User talk:LMB500|talk]]) 17:21, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::::And what I am seeing is a possible boomerang. This (for example) [[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yazidis&diff=898248935&oldid=898238837]] is not (despite what you say) vandalism. Note that it usually requires 4 (not 3) reverts for an edit war violation to take place, so whilst (technically) it was edit warring it was of a sufficiently low level for an admin to say "no violation" which they did. Also I note you fetch up out of nowhere to make this revert [[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yazidis&diff=898254231&oldid=898248935]. Not only to an article you have never edited before, but this is your first ever edit here.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 17:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:This is the fifth time this month, I've been reported to [[ANI]] by [[single-purpose account]]s (IPs). Check [[User_talk:Ahmedo_Semsurî#Notice_of_edit_warring_noticeboard_discussion]]. To be honest, I have no idea what the problem is now. I did get a warning for calling an IP "a troll"[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kurmanjis&diff=prev&oldid=898120172][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAhmedo_Semsur%C3%AE&type=revision&diff=898192509&oldid=898191322] by 'El C' and didn't interact with that IP anymore (but I stand by my words on me having a feeling it's the same person behind all of these IP's). --[[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] ([[User talk:Ahmedo Semsurî|talk]]) 17:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::I have to say I find it odd too. It may not be a duck, but I think it is at least a seagull.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 17:33, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::behave exactly this way: he combines all ip addresses and tagging them and gives them a name. apparently he knows everyone personally and has the gift to attack everyone.[[User:LMB500|LMB500]] ([[User talk:LMB500|talk]]) 17:35, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::::{{Non-admin comment}}{{Ping|LMB500}} You're only making things worse for yourself by continuing to comment. The fact that you seem to know well how he behaves towards IP users, despite your user account and your listed IP having only a couple interactions with him, strongly suggests that you've been more than one of those IP users. You're pretty much asking for a [[WP:BOOMERANG]] at this point. [[User:Creffett|creffett]] ([[User talk:Creffett|talk]]) 17:42, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::::The problem is that he is right, it does seem a hell of a lot of SP IP's have fetched up out of nowhere to edit articles he is editing. Now it may well be coincidence, but when some of them also show some knowledge of our procedures (far more then a knew users should know) I start to think they may have a point. Now I would advise him to lay of IP's, but I would advise you to drop this. You (I think) do not have a very strong case, certainly one no stronger then his claim you maybe a sock. An admin (at the SPI) told you there was no violation, you have now continued this here, continuing the drama is not a good idea.[[User:Slatersteven|Slatersteven]] ([[User talk:Slatersteven|talk]]) 17:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::{{Non-admin comment}} I don't think Ahmedo Semsurî should even have been warned about using "troll", and he undersold his victimhood: just look at his user talk page!
::::::*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ahmedo_Semsur%C3%AE&diff=897999710&oldid=896554770 62.26.157.20 "ANI" 14:36, 20 May 2019]
::::::*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ahmedo_Semsur%C3%AE&diff=898047487&oldid=898008198 81.37.160.164 "ANI notice" 21:23, 20 May 2019]
::::::*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ahmedo_Semsur%C3%AE&diff=898191322&oldid=898047487 83.110.196.147 "Ani-discussion" 20:19, 21 May 2019]
::::::*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ahmedo_Semsur%C3%AE&diff=898262547&oldid=898192509 14.202.143.218 "Notice" 09:15, 22 May 2019]
::::::*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ahmedo_Semsur%C3%AE&diff=898290865&oldid=898262686 "ani" LBM500 13:10, 22 May 2019]
:::::if that's not targeted harassment from obviously the same user (or users following a specific MO in concert), I don't know what is. 5 accounts within 47 hours saying the same thing sure sounds like an SP or MP and is objectively trolling and harassing Ahmedo Semsuri. [[User:JesseRafe|JesseRafe]] ([[User talk:JesseRafe|talk]]) 18:20, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:I guess its settled then. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yazidis&type=revision&diff=898300961&oldid=898285100] --[[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] ([[User talk:Ahmedo Semsurî|talk]]) 18:18, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::I am sorry you were subjected to this kind of bullying. If someone wrote that against other ethnic groups, it would have been [[WP:RD3]]'d immediately and the user blocked. <span style="background-color:#cee">[[User:Wumbolo|<span style="color:#066;font-family:Symbol">w</span><span style="color:#066;font-family:Segoe Script">umbolo</span>]]</span> [[User talk:Wumbolo|<span style="color:#37C;font-family:webdings">^^^</span>]] 18:56, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Because I'm not that familiar with the history, I don't really have that much of anything to add at this time beyond what I wrote at the AN3 report linked above where I encountered this dispute. But I will say, at the very least, that I'm glad the IP finally registereda username and that I now look forward to their productive contributions, hopefully, away from pages frequented by Ahmedo Semsurî. [[User:El_C|El_C]] 20:05, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:I just received the message "There have been multiple failed attempts to log in to your account from a new device. Please make sure your account has a strong password." I've strengthened my password as precaution, but this is getting annoying. --[[User:Ahmedo Semsurî|Ahmedo Semsurî]] ([[User talk:Ahmedo Semsurî|talk]]) 20:34, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
== Malaysian IP with strange contribs ==
{{IPsummary|2001:D08:DB:CEC0:F883:2D25:DC24:A157/48}} (a Malaysian IP range appearing to represent a single editor) is making odd-looking contribs that appear to be in a Malay-related language, targeting the talk pages of Singapore IPs. Some type examples from just the past month:
* [[Special:Diff/898065244]]
* [[Special:Diff/897866232]]
* [[Special:Diff/898288519]]
* [[Special:Diff/897823308]]
* [[Special:Diff/897002848]]
* [[Special:Diff/894883359]]
* [[Special:Diff/893353535]]
* [[Special:Diff/897762899]]
* [[Special:Diff/892761507]]
* The history of [[User talk:101.127.100.69]] and others shows them reverting similar looking (to a non-Malay-speaker) edits by other IPs.
* At least one of the IPs was blocked [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&action=view&page=2001%3AD08%3ADB%3ADD92%3A45B1%3AFD1F%3A3674%3A2370&type=block here] (is there a way of using a wildcard for the block log query? Things like "2001:d08:db::0/48" and "2001:d08:db:*" don't work.)
* At least one of their posts to a talk page had to be revdel'd: [[Special:Diff/893353938]]
Can someone familiar with the language(s) and Malaysia/Singapore have a look? <span style="color:red">—[</span>[[User:AlanM1|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:green">Alan</span><span style="color:blue">M</span><span style="color:purple">1</span>]]([[User talk:AlanM1#top|talk]])<span style="color:red">]—</span> 17:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
== Probable compromised admin account ==
* {{admin|Nv8200pa}}
Related: [[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Weird_new_user_account]] / [[User_talk:Nv8200pa#Unblocking_webhost_ranges]]
Appears to be compromised - and has been blocked as such based on CU by {{u|TonyBallioni}}. [[User:SQL|<span style="font-size:7pt;color: #fff;background:#900;border:2px solid #999">SQL</span>]][[User talk:SQL|<sup style="font-size: 5pt;color:#999">Query me!</sup>]] 20:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*I'll copy my comment from VPT: I ran a check after unrevdeling the log entries. There were several oddities in the edits that to me suggested the likelihood of account compromise. The account moved from editing on a static IP with one operating system for all previous edits within the CU period to a proxy with an entirely different device for the log entries in question. I have blocked locally, notified ArbCom, and requested a steward lock the account. [[User:TonyBallioni|TonyBallioni]] ([[User talk:TonyBallioni|talk]]) 20:15, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*:{{ping|TonyBallioni}} Both accounts have been locked, see [https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=31653714] and [https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&logid=31653678] --[[User:DannyS712|DannyS712]] ([[User talk:DannyS712|talk]]) 20:16, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
* Seems like we got a [[NCIS (season 16)|extra season special]]. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 20:23, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*Nv8200pa is also an Admin on Commons. Do you block that also? [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 21:48, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*:{{ping|Maile66}} The account was globally locked --[[User:DannyS712|DannyS712]] ([[User talk:DannyS712|talk]]) 21:49, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*::Also note, they are [[Special:CentralAuth/Nv8200pa|not]] a commons admin. — [[User:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#FF9933; font-weight:bold; font-family:monotype;">xaosflux</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#009933;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 21:56, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*:::OK. Don't know where I got that idea, but I guess it was enhanced memory. [[User:Maile66|— Maile ]] ([[User talk:Maile66|talk]]) 21:59, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
* To update folks here - we (the [[meta:Trust and Safety|Trust and Safety team]]) are looking into this now. I believe the situation involving {{u|Nv8200pa}} ''should'' now be resolved. [[User:JSutherland (WMF)|Joe Sutherland (WMF)]] ([[User talk:JSutherland (WMF)|talk]]) 22:37, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
* Note Arbcom's request for deysop was processed, see also their notice here: [[Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Noticeboard#Level_1_desysop_of_Nv8200pa]]. — [[User:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#FF9933; font-weight:bold; font-family:monotype;">xaosflux</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#009933;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 00:18, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
* Update: The account has been [https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:CentralAuth&target=Nv8200pa unlocked], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ANv8200pa unblocked]. [[User:SQL|<span style="font-size:7pt;color: #fff;background:#900;border:2px solid #999">SQL</span>]][[User talk:SQL|<sup style="font-size: 5pt;color:#999">Query me!</sup>]] 02:00, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
==User creation log==
* I think it's a good time to ask if there is any good reason for a user creation log to be revdeled, which cannot be handled with suppression? And the reason I'm asking is because after a revdel, the account is virtually invisible for all non-admins patrolling [[Special:Log/newusers]]. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 20:34, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::I think there can be, especially when you consider that the oversight policy has a high bar. And [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=delete&page=Special%3ALog%2Fnewusers it's not exactly rare] even with oversighters. They should probably always be blocked first though. -- [[user:zzuuzz|zzuuzz]] <sup>[[user_talk:zzuuzz|(talk)]]</sup> 20:44, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::So, how do you think we can prevent things like this? This account was only found because of Danny testing SQL, which was just pure luck. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 20:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::::Sometimes, [[Special:Log/rights]] is one of the more interesting pages to browse. I haven't looked into this, but maybe we could filter it? -- [[user:zzuuzz|zzuuzz]] <sup>[[user_talk:zzuuzz|(talk)]]</sup> 20:50, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::Yeah, my point is, if everything is revdeled, the chances of finding out is almost negligible, there basically has to be an admin monitoring [[Special:Log/delete]] to find fishy revdels. Disabling revdels on account creations and/or somehow implementing software thresholds on suspicious permissions grants is probably the only way to tackle that, even [[Special:Log/rights]] cannot be monitored by non-admins when it's revdeled. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 20:57, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::Revdel'd logs are rare. If you see it in your favourite log then there is an easy way of finding at least who has been revdeleting. Go to [[Special:Log]] and enter Special:Log/newusers or Special:Log/rights (etc) as the target. -- [[user:zzuuzz|zzuuzz]] <sup>[[user_talk:zzuuzz|(talk)]]</sup> 21:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::::It's not about having a favourite log and it's not about finding out who is revdeleting. It is impossible to draw conclusions from seeing the revdel logs alone, the [[Special:Log/delete]] log where Nv8200pa revdeled the user creation log is completely innocuous and any editor looking at it would not know anything, the only way is, as Danny says, fetch a database table of new accounts with advanced permissions and check which of them are suspect, which I guess is what we have to do from now on. My suggestion was to simply make one particular log open to all on-wiki to ensure transparency and prevent situations like this. To reiterate, revdel is a blackbox that no one can get into, and even being able to see who is revdeling is pointless, since you cannot make an inference without any premise. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 21:20, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::::Unfortunately an unredacted new user log will also tell you nothing. The rights log with a revdeletion will tell you a lot, and the logs of revdeleted logs tell you a whole lot more. I haven't looked closely, but I doubt [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=delete&page=Special%3ALog%2Frights any of these] in the history of Wikipedia are useful. Also, folks should run for RfA. But getting back to the point, I can think of a filter which could detect when these types of account get used. -- [[user:zzuuzz|zzuuzz]] <sup>[[user_talk:zzuuzz|(talk)]]</sup> 21:36, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:::::::::{{ec}} Well, the Quarry approach exists still, so it's not like there's no way out. Just trying to invite discussion on what we can do about it. And as for {{tq|folks should run for RfA}}, I concur. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 21:59, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::::::::::{{ping|QEDK}} I've created [[Quarry:query/36217]], which lists users that have a permission labeled "uncommon" in [[Template:Requests for permissions]]. --[[User:DannyS712|DannyS712]] ([[User talk:DannyS712|talk]]) 22:07, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:{{ping|QEDK}} You can go through the user table by registration. See [[Quarry:query/36357]] for the 100 entry segment that contains the creation of the relevant account (even when the log entry is hidden, the account registration is still there). [[Quarry:query/36358]] shows the most recent 100. --[[User:DannyS712|DannyS712]] ([[User talk:DannyS712|talk]]) 20:49, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::So, it's basically still public, just terribly less accessible, and the obvious loss of information. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 20:57, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
:@[[User:QEDK|QEDK]], regarding the original {{tq|is any good reason for a user creation log to be revdeled}} query, yes on occasion; we don't want [[User:QEDK's home phone number is 555 1234]] or the like being visible in any form. ‑ [[User:Iridescent|Iridescent]] 21:52, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
::{{ec}} That would also fall under supression criteria (assumed OUTing) afaik, so {{shrug}} --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 21:59, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*For the most part, logs don't need redacting. But there are some cases where an vandalistic name might get created and depending on the situation redacting may be useful. Note, I "upgraded" this discussion to a L2 heading since it seems to be about this topic in general, not this specific incident - also this probably belong at a better venue than ANI if it will beyond this incident. — [[User:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#FF9933; font-weight:bold; font-family:monotype;">xaosflux</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#009933;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 21:54, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*: Well, it's more of an implication from, and causation of, the thread above that I thought I needed to put forward. I don't mind, no. --<span style="font-family:'Trebuchet MS',Geneva,sans-serif">[[User:QEDK|qedk]] ([[User talk:QEDK|t]] <span style="color:#fac">桜</span> [[Special:Contributions/QEDK|c]])</span> 22:00, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*:: Mostly that- this will likely extend well beyond the incident management above. — [[User:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#FF9933; font-weight:bold; font-family:monotype;">xaosflux</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Xaosflux|<span style="color:#009933;">Talk</span>]]</sup> 22:36, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
*:::As noted already you can still see new accounts elsewhere. There’s no need to try to break a feature particularly where the fact someone revdel’ed the creation log sent up red flags. Not that it’s wrong to do so, but it’s abnormal, particularly when you’re “hiding" something you allegedly created. As such it was always likely to get noticed and no need to be concerned about patrolling by non-admins. The revdel ability has its utility for disruptive names. One can always ask an admin about a revdel as well. '''[[User:NJA|<em style="font-family:Arial;color:#6600CC">NJA</em>]]''' <small> | [[User_talk:NJA|<span style="color:#63D1F4">talk</span>]]</small> 01:40, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
== Anne Knish ==
*{{userlinks|Anne Knish}}
There's something really strange going on here; it might be socking, it might not, I really don't know. After I raised some concerns (a couple others have as well; see their talk page) about this user leaving disruptive edit summaries (using many different languages/summaries that sounded like weird stream-of-consciousness personal musings, rather than describing the minor, but often constructive edit actually being made), they've [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Anne_Knish&diff=898350138&oldid=898292831 finally responded by making strange accusations about another user] (or maybe this is the same person, who knows). They seem to have indicated that they're now abandoning the (fairly recently created) account. But it sounds like they're just going to make another one to continue avoiding scrutiny. Everything about this feels oddly familiar, but I can't put my finger on it. Maybe someone else here will have a better idea of what the hell's going on, or if an eye should be kept on this.
Sorry if this is all a bit vague, but the claim in that final talk page message just weirded me out enough that I thought that maybe some more experienced eyes might be able to sort this out. –[[User:Deacon Vorbis|Deacon Vorbis]] ([[User Talk:Deacon Vorbis|carbon]] • [[Special:Contributions/Deacon Vorbis|videos]]) 01:33, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
: {{Non-admin comment}} {{User|VesuviusDogg}} (the editor referenced in the diff you linked) definitely looks like the same editor based on edit summaries. I agree that this looks oddly familiar in some other way, but I can't put my finger on it either. I'll keep my eyes open too. Given that both are (supposedly) inactive, not sure if it's worth opening an SPI, and I don't think they've been disruptive enough for a CU. [[User:Creffett|creffett]] ([[User talk:Creffett|talk]]) 03:09, 23 May 2019 (UTC)All content in the above text box is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license Version 4 and was originally sourced from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=898368015.
  This site is not affiliated with or endorsed in any way by the Wikimedia Foundation or any of its affiliates. In fact, we fucking despise them.
|